FOREST POLICY & REDD PLUS PROJECT A BASELINE STUDY 01

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Imprint

This publication is by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit through the Climate-relevant Modernization of Forest Policy and Piloting of REDD Project in the , funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) under its International Climate Initiative, The BMU supports this Initiative based on a decision of the German Parliament. For more information see http: //www. international-climate-initiative.com

May 2012

Manila, Philippines

Contact Dr. Bernd-Markus Liss Principal Advisor

Climate-relevant Modernization of Forest Policy and Piloting of REDD

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

Department of Environment and Natural Resources Climate Change Office 2nd Floor, FASPO Building Avenue, , 1101 Philippines

Phone +63 2 929 6626 local 207 Fax +63 2 892 3374 Email [email protected]

Source and Copyrights © 2012 GIZ

Authors Dr. Pedro T. Armenia Dr. Ma. Salome B. Bulayog Dr. Teofanes R. Patindol Mr. Moises Neil V. Serino Ms. Nelfa M. Glova

Citation GIZ 2012 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in , Philippines. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, November 2011.

ISBN: 978-971-95451-0-1 CLIMATE-RELEVANT MODERNIZATION OF Socio-Economic FOREST POLICY AND PILOTING OF REDD Baseline for the REDD+ BASELINE STUDY Project Sites in Southern Leyte 01

A PUBLICATION BY THE DEUTSCHE GESELLSCHAFT FÜR INTERNATIONALE ZUSAMMENARBEIT (GIZ) GMBH Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), for providing funding support to this project. Specifically, we would like to thank Dr. Bernd-Markus Liss, Principal Advisor, Forest Policy and REDD Plus Project for his approval of this project and for providing overall supervision in the implementation as well as his important comments and suggestions to improve the final project report; Mr. Dominik Fortenbacher, for his initiative to initially meet with the VSU team, his constant coordination work as well as his valuable comments and suggestions for the improvement of the final report; We are also grateful to the participants: Ricardo T. Tomol of PENRO-DENR, Southern Leyte, Don Ignacio of GIZ-REDD+, Vince Delector, Jr. of GIZ EnRD / REDD+, Sonny Salvoza of GIZ- EnRD, and the VSU faculty members: Dr. Eduardo O. Mangaong, Dr. Arturo E. Pasa, Dr. Juliet C. Ceniza as well as the other participants for their comments and suggestions during the project presentation and workshop held at VSU on November 29, 2011. We are also grateful for the administrative support provided by Mr. Bernard Agawin, former Senior Adviser, GIZ-REDD+ Project during the entire duration of the project.

We are also grateful to the (VSU) President, Dr. Jose L. Bacusmo and the Vice-President for Research and Extension, Dr. Othello B. Capuno, for the approval to allow the research team to conduct the study. We are also indebted to the local government units (LGUs) at the city / municipality and levels as well as the representatives of the Peoples’ Organizations’ in the REDD+ pilot and non-pilot sites in City and the Municipalities of Bontoc, Sogod, , and all of Southern Leyte for providing assistance to the team and the enumerators and for facilitating and allowing the research team to collect the needed data and conduct interviews in the identifiedbarangays .

Our gratitude also goes to all the enumerators for their research assistance in the conduct of the household survey; Ms. Elsie Tausa, Ms. Yasmin Casillano, Ms. Adelfa Diola, and Ms. Roseli-Fatima Sosmeña for the data encoding and assistance in tabulation of results and in complying with the required clerical tasks; the household respondents and community leaders for their time and cooperation during the survey, and key-informants who provided us valuable information to validate or contrast our initial findings. Most and above all, we wish to give thanks and praise to the Lord and our Almighty God for which each one of us always draw our strength from Him.

Comments related to this report should be sent to the Project Team Leader: Dr. Pedro T. Armenia, Department of Economics, College of Management & Economics, Visayas State Universtiy, Visca, City, Leyte 6521-A. +6353-335-2634, +63530- 7304 or +639176522562. Email: [email protected]

This research project was commissioned and funded by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. ii Foreword

Forests used to be one of the richest natural resources in the Philippines. Barely sixty years ago more than 40% of the islands’ land surface was covered with forest; now only about 24% remains. The combined effects of indiscriminate logging, mining, inadequate forest protection, fires, pests, expansion of upland agriculture, and unplanned land conversion are cited as the main causes of forest depletion. The decline in forest cover goes along with a significant loss of ecological services provided by forests, such as biodiversity conservation, storage capacity for water, prevention of soil degradation and soil erosion. Forests are where millions of Filipinos dwell in and is their source of livelihood. Forest loss is also associated with deteriorating living conditions of forest dependent communities.

Forests play an important role for our climate. They regulate local and regional climate, and sequester and store carbon. By removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere forests can contribute significantly to mitigate climate change. Deforestation and forest degradation, however, lead to high release of greenhouse gas emissions. Worldwide, the forest sector is the second leading sector responsible for anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Following the energy sector it is responsible for approximately 17% of CO2 emissions, largely as a result of deforestation. By protecting forests and enhancing carbon stocks through reforestation, forest rehabilitation and sustainable management an important contribution to mitigate the effects of climate change could be achieved. Climate change is of critical concern to the Philippines, since the country is one of the areas most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in .

The Philippines have recognized that negative effects from deforestation and forest degradation are one of the main future challenges in the country. The concept of REDD-plus provides a framework for reacting to these challenges and through the formulation of the National REDD-plus Strategy, the first steps for the implementation of REDD-plus has been brought on track in the Philippines.

The project “Climate-relevant Modernization of the National Forest Policy and Piloting of REDD Measures in the Philippines,” funded under the International Climate Protection Initiative of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment (BMU), supports the country’s efforts towards forest and climate protection and the development of appropriate policy and instruments. The Project is implemented by GIZ together with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as the main partner, in cooperation with local government units (LGUs) and a wide range of stakeholders, in line with the Philippine National REDD-plus Strategy (PNRPS). The Project aims at an improved forest policy and the development of incentives for forest protection and rehabilitation, reduction of greenhouse gases (conservation of biodiversity, and building of capacities towards this end. It focuses on forest policy reforms and REDD-plus pilot activities in the selected project area in Southern Leyte to inform the implementation of REDD- plus in the Philippines.

iii An important feature of REDD-Plus is also the provision of the so called co-benefits: biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction. Especially with the background that human behavior has the highest impacts on deforestation and forest degradation, it is crucial to involve the local population in REDD-plus activities and create a win-win situation for people and forest to make such protection of forest ecosystem happen. This study is part of a wider approach to analyze frame conditions and implementation options for REDD-plus in the Philippines, to enhance forest functions, and finally achieve reduced emissions and co-benefits. In this context GIZ supports the conduct of country wide policy studies on the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, forest policies, the issue of carbon rights and on free, prior, informed consent (FPIC) as an important safeguard for REDD-plus.

With this socio-economic study about the REDD-plus pilot area in Southern Leyte we have realized an extraordinary basis for learning more about the living conditions of the people and the connection between local population and forest resources. Having the knowledge of the socio-economic profile within REDD-plus pilot areas is the first step towards learning more about people’s dependence on forest ecosystems, knowing the interaction between forest and people and identifying people’s behavior in using forest resources. Furthermore, a socio-economic baseline provides important information on how projects and activities should be designed to achieve highest benefit for people and consequently for the forest ecosystem, and lays the ground to be able to measure impacts of any intervention, later on. Together with a satellite-based forest cover change analysis, a forest carbon assessment, and a biodiversity survey, the study will form part of the measuring, reporting and verification (MRV) system that is required for REDD-plus.

At the same time the comprehensive set of gathered data - probably the most comprehensive existing data set of the area ever - will be available for further studies on forest ecosystems and people in Southern Leyte. Thus, it will provide the basis for various future research projects.

I would like to thank the study team of VSU headed by Dr. Pedro Armenia for their endurance in collecting, handling and analyzing the immense amount of data and for the smooth and uncomplicated cooperation during this research project. I thank them for their excellent work! It has created a valuable source of knowledge for our work with people and forests in Southern Leyte.

Dr. Bernd Markus Liss GIZ Principal Advisor Forest Policy and REDD-plus Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii FOREWORD iii LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES xii LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES xiii LIST OF ACRONYMS xiv SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS xvi

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND 1 1.1 Objectives of the Project 2 1.2 Theoretical Framework 2 2. METHODOLOGY 3 2.1 Sampling Scheme 4 2.2 Data Collection Technique 5 2.3 Formulation of Data Instrument and Pre-testing 6 2.4 Data Collection and Analysis 6 2.5 Limitations of the Study 7 3. BACKGROUND OF SOUTHERN LEYTE 9 3.1 Natural and Physical Characteristics 9 3.2 Demographics 10 3.3 Crop Production in the Pilot Sites 13 3.4 Business Establishments 15 3.5 Physical Resources and Existing Land Use 16 3.6 Water, Sanitation, and Solid Waste Management 20 3.7 Electricity and Communications 21 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 23 4.1 REDD+ and Non-REDD+ Sites 23 4.2 Distribution of Household Respondents 23 4.3 Socio-demographic Characteristics 25 4.3.1 Household Assets / Possessions 32 4.3.2 Information Sources 40 4.3.3 Community Organizations 43 4.3.4 Facilities Available 44 4.3.5 Food Adequacy 48 4.4 Credit and Loan Information 53 4.5 Marketing of Farm Products 57

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte v 4.6 Access to Land and Natural Resources 61 4.6.1 Access to Land 61 4.6.2 Access to Natural Resources 65 4.7 Farm Characteristics and Upland Farming System 71 4.7.1 Number of Parcels and Farm Area Cultivated 71 4.7.2 Cropping Systems and Crops Planted 71 4.7.3 Perennial / Permanent Crops Planted 74 4.7.4 Poultry and Livestock Raising 77 4.7.5 Forest Products Harvesting and Marketing 78 4.7.6 Other Production Practices 80 4.7.7 Post-harvest Facilities 80 4.8 Income and Expenditure 83 4.8.1 Sources of Income 83 4.8.2 Farm Income 84 4.8.3 Off-farm and Non-farm Income 87 4.8.4 Income from Other Sources 90 4.8.5 Annual Household Income and Expenditures 91 4.9 Household Characteristics, Amount of Income and Expenditure by Income Clusters 95 4.9.1 Membership in Organization 95 4.9.2 Number of Parcels, Area of Farm Cultivated, and Input Utilization 96 4.9.3 Perennial / Permanent Crops and Forest Trees Planted 97 4.9.4 Sources of Household Income 98 4.9.5 Gross Farm Income and Gross Margins 99 4.9.6 Non-farm and Other Sources of Income 99 4.9.7 Gross Income 101 4.9.8 Household Expenditures 102 4.10 Environmental Activities and Awareness 105 4.10.1 Method of Waste Disposal 105 4.10.2 Perception on Selected Environmental Attributes 108 4.10.3 Perceived Changes of Selected Farm Attributes 109 4.10.4 Awareness on Risks Associated with Deforestation 111 4.10.5 Awareness on Risks Associated with Environmental Degradation 112

REFERENCES 114 APPENDICES 117 DEFINITION OF TERMS 128 vi Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte List of Tables

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

1 Number of barangays and households interviewed in REDD+ areas 5 2 Number of barangays and households interviewed in Non-REDD areas 5 3 Population, population growth rate, density and land area in the Pilot 11 Sites (2007) 4 Average annual income and expenditure of families in , 12 2009 5 Land status of land (2002), coconut production and average 15 yield (MT / ha) for 2000 in the pilot sites 6 Rice production, area harvested, yield / ha. in the pilot sites for 2008 15 7 Number of manufacturing establishments in the pilot site from 2005 to 15 2009 8 Number of employment-generating firms in the pilot sites 16 9 Land classification of the pilot sites 17 10 Land suitability (hectares) in the pilot sites 19 11 Protected lands in the pilot sites 19 12 Area Distribution of Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development 19 Zone (SAFDZ) in the pilot sites 13 Households with access and without access to potable water in the 20 pilot sites 14 Solid waste facilities in the pilot sites (2010) 21 15 Manner of garbage disposal in the pilot sites 21 16 Coverage and actual connections and members by municipality / sitio / 22 purok (2009), Province of Southern Leyte 17 Inventory of cell sites, service provider and basic telephone service 22 availability in the pilot sites 18 Distribution of respondents by municipality and by study sites 24 19 Socio-demographic characteristics of household heads 25 20 Household structure / type of family 26 21 Household size, number of children, and other household members 26 22 Educational attainment of household heads 27 23 Educational facilities present in the barangay 28 24 Type of school attended by members of households 29 25 Household members’ reasons for not attending school 29 26 Ethnic background of head of households 30 27 Places of origin of head of households and spouse 31 28 Reasons of household heads for moving into the present residence 31 29 Reason of spouses for moving into the present residence 32 30 Decision-making among households 32

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte vii TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE 31 Distribution of respondents according to their household possessions 33 32 Mode of acquisition of household assets 35 33 Status of ownership of the house 35 34 Types of roofing materials used for the house 35 35 Types of flooring materials used by the households 36 36 Materials used as walls for the house 36 37 Source of drinking water for the households 37 38 Type of toilet used by the households 38 39 Source of lights used by the households 38 40 Fuel used for cooking by the households 39 41 Source of fuel wood used for cooking 39 42 Source of charcoal used for cooking 40 43 Source of coco fronds used for cooking 40 44 Sources of information of the households 41 45 Importance of television as source of information of the households 41 46 Importance of radio as source of information 41 47 Importance of friends / relative as source of information 42 48 Access to mobile phone communication services 42 49 Regular access to rainfall, market prices, and policy changes 43 50 Membership of any organizations 43 51 Type of organizations 44 52 Reasons for joining village-level organizations 44 53 Number of public elementary schools as of 2010 45 54 Classification of secondary schools as of 2010 46 55 Health facilities available in the study sites 46 56 Health facilities present in the barangay 47 57 Recreational facilities present in the barangay 48 58 Other facilities present in the barangay 48 59 Number of family that reported having experienced hunger 49 60 Average number of day household members experienced hunger or 49 eating less 61 Months of the year when the family experience hunger 49 62 Coping mechanisms when experiencing hunger 50 63 Coping mechanisms of household when food supply is insufficient 51 64 Respondents’ perception about quantity of food supply 51 65 Reasons for deteriorating food supply condition 52 66 Reasons for improved food supply 52 67 Kinds of lending institutions 53 68 Types of loan availed by the households 54 69 Purpose of loan 55 70 Credit facilities present in the barangay 55

viii Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE 71 Crops produced and / or marketed by the farmers 57 72 Distribution of farm-households according to existence of land tenure 61 arrangement 73 Distribution of farm-households according to nature of tenure 61 arrangement 74 Distribution of farm-households according to nature of land ownership 62 75 Distribution of farm-households according to land tenure 62 76 Distribution of farm-household according to mode of land acquisition 63 77 Distribution of farm-households according to sharing arrangement (for 63 share-tenant) 78 Distribution of farm-households according to status of land ownership 64 79 Reasons why the land is not titled 64 80 Distribution of farm-households whether they have heard cases of 65 land lost due to lack of proof of ownership 81 Distribution of respondents according to access to natural resources 65 82 Distribution of respondents according to means of access to the 66 sources / location of natural resources 83 Distribution of respondents according to road type available in the 66 sources / location of natural resources 84 Distribution of respondents according to awareness of hunting 67 activities in the locality 85 Distribution of respondents according to the kind of wildlife they are 67 hunting 86 Personal consumption of the hunted animals 68 87 Distribution of respondents according to frequency of hunting 68 88 Distribution of respondents according to awareness of illegal logging in 68 the area 89 Distribution of respondents according to the kind of trees being cut in 69 the area 90 Distribution of respondents according to trading points of lumber from 69 trees being cut 91 Distribution of respondents according to frequency of cutting trees 69 92 Number of parcels and farm area cultivated 71 93 Cropping systems practiced by the households in farm parcel 1 72 94 Crops planted in parcel 1 72 95 Cropping systems in parcel 2 73 96 Crops planted in parcel 2 73 97 Cropping systems in parcel 3 74 98 Crops planted in parcel 3 74 99 Perennial / permanent crops planted (all parcels considered) 74 100 Summary of crop combinations planted by farmers in REDD+ and Non- 75 REDD+ sites in Southern Leyte based on principal or dominant crop 101 Reasons for not planting trees 76 102 Reasons for not using land for farming 77

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte ix TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE 103 Raising of poultry and livestock on the farm 78 104 Kind of poultry and livestock raised by the households 78 105 Forest products harvested and marketed by the households 79 106 Distribution of respondents practicing kaingin / shifting cultivation for 80 the past five years 107 Distribution of respondents practicing crop rotation 80 108 Soil-related problems on the farm 80 109 Availability of postharvest facilities 81 110 Primary and secondary source of income of household heads 84 111 Family, hired, and total labor utilized in man-days 85 112 Distribution of farm-households according to material inputs utilized 85 in their farm 113 Gross farm income, total variable costs, and gross margins 86 114 Distribution of households with earnings from off-farm and non-farm 87 related activities 115 Non-farm income sources of the households 88 116 Nature of work for those with salaries and wages 88 117 Income from trading or buying and selling businesses 89 118 Nature and income from home-based industries and related activities 89 119 Types of transportation services that are income sources 90 120 Income from other sources 90 121 Forest products harvested as source of household income 91 122 Annual income from different sources 93 123 Average and median annual household expenditures 94 124 Distribution of sample households by project sites and income cluster 95 125 Membership in organization by income cluster 96 126 Number of parcels cultivated and area of farm by income cluster 96 127 Utilization of material inputs by income cluster 97 128 Perennial / permanent crops planted by income cluster 98 129 Sources of income by cluster 98 130 Gross farm income, total variable costs, and gross margins per farm 99 and per hectare by cluster 131 Sources of non-farm income by cluster 100 132 Other sources of non-farm income of farm-household respondents by 100 cluster 133 Mean and median income by cluster 101 134 Mean and median annual household expenditures by income cluster 102 135 Method of garbage disposal 105 136 Participation in environmental activities 106 137 Nature of environmental activities 106 138 Reasons for not participating in environmental activities 106 139 Nature of environmental concerns 107 140 Implementing agencies of environment-related activities 107 x Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE 141 Reason for involvement in environment-related activities 108 142 Willingness to participate in future environment-related activities 108 143 Assessment / perception on the damage in the farm brought about by 109 natural calamities 144 Assessment / perception on the availability of naturally occurring plant 109 resources 145 Assessment / perception on the availability of birds and other animals 109 in the locality 146 Assessment / perception on the rate of forest destruction in the 109 locality 147 Assessment / perception on the rate of soil erosion 110 148 Assessment / perception on soil fertility 111 149 Assessment / perception on crop yield 111 150 Assessment / perception on farm income 111 151 Assessment / perception on the outbreak of pest and diseases 111 152 Perception of the scale of deforestation 112 153 Factors that lead to deforestation 112 154 Awareness of any risk brought by deforestation and environmental 113 degradation 155 Environmental risks experienced or encountered during the last five 113 years

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xi List of Figures

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGES 1 Map of Southern Leyte showing the five study sites 10 2 Region 8 poverty incidence for 2006 and 2009 (Adopted from NSO) 11 3 Proportion of children aged 6-12 years old who are not attending 13 Elementary School (Adopted from Southern Leyte CBMS Survey 2008) 4 Distribution of respondents in project sites 23 5 Map showing the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ barangays 24 6 Places of origin of head of households 30 7 Proportion of average gross income by source and by income cluster 101 8 Percentage allocation of household expenditures by income cluster 103

xii Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte List of Appendix Tables

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGES 1 List of barangays included in the REDD+ project sites 117 2 List of barangays included in the Non-REDD+ project sites 118 3 Number of barangays by study site 118 4 Primary market outlet for coconut 118 5 Reasons for choice of market outlet for coconut 119 6 Mode of transporting coconut 119 7 Primary market outlet for rootcrops 119 8 Reasons for choice of market outlet for rootcrops 119 9 Mode of transporting rootcrops 120 10 Product delivery for rootcrops 120 11 Primary market outlet for rice 120 12 Reasons for choice of market outlet for rice 120 13 Mode of transporting rice 121 14 Product delivery for rice 121 15 Primary market outlet for banana 121 16 Reasons for choice of market outlet for banana 121 17 Mode of transporting banana 122 18 Primary market outlet for abaca 122 19 Reasons for choice of market outlet for abaca 122 20 Mode of transporting abaca 122 21 Primary market outlet for fruits 122 22 Reasons for choice of market outlet for fruit trees 123 23 Mode of transporting fruit trees 123 24 Primary market outlet for vegetables 123 25 Reasons for choice of market outlet for vegetables 123 26 Mode of transporting vegetables 123 27 Specific actions done on soil erosion 124 28 Specific actions done on La Niña 124 29 Specific actions done on increase in temperature 124 30 Specific actions done on flooding due to strong typhoon 125 31 Specific actions done on drought 125

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xiii List of Acronyms

A&D Alienable and Disposable Land ABTV Abaca Bunchy Top Virus APGR Annual Population Growth Rate BMU German Federal Ministry for the Environment BSWM Bureau of Soils and Water Management CBFM Community-Based Forest Management CCBA Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance CFC Couples For Christ CLOA Certificate of Land Ownership Awards CLUPs Comprehensive Land Use Plans CSC Certificate of Stewardship Contract DAR Department of Agrarian Reform DA-RFU Department of Agriculture - Regional Field Unit DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DTI Department of Trade and Industry EP Emancipation Patents FIES Family Income and Expenditure Survey GI Galvanized Iron sheet GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GK Gawad Kalinga GSIS Government Service Insurance System ISFP Integrated Social Forestry Program LGUs Local Government Units LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas MDG Millennium Development Goal MPDOs Municipal / City Planning and Development Offices M.T. Metric Ton MW Megawatts NGO Non-Government Organization NIPAS National Integrated Protected Areas System Non-REDD+ Non-Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation NPAAD Network of Protected Areas for Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Development NRPS National REDD Strategy NSCB National Statistical Coordination Board NSO National Statistics Office NCSO National Census and Statistics Office

xiv Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte NTC National Telecommunication Company OPA (OPAG) Office of the Provincial Agriculture PCA Philippine Coconut Authority PENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office PPP / PPFP Provincial Physical Framework Plan for Southern Leyte REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation RTW Ready To Wear clothing retail SAFDZ Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone SOLECO Southern Leyte Electric Cooperative SMS Short Message Service SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences TV Television VHS / VCD / Video Home System / Video Compact Disc / Digital Video Disc / Compact DVD / CD Disc YFC Youth For Christ

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xv Summary & Conclusions

The study which included 797 randomly chosen household respondents in the five pilot REDD+ sites in Southern Leyte was conducted to establish a socio- economic baseline to describe the pre-project socio-economic conditions at the REDD+ pilot project sites and Non-REDD+ sites or control sites. The survey was conducted from May 11, 2011 to June 29, 2011 in 71 REDD+ pilot barangays and 21 Non-REDD+ barangays in Bontoc, Sogod, Tomas Oppus, Silago, and Maasin City, Southern Leyte. Of the wide ranging data and information collected from the 200 Non-REDD+ and 597 REDD+ sample farm-households included in the project sites, among others, the important results that are considered relevant or identified to have possible consequence to the REDD+ project implementation are the following:

POPULATION GROWTH AND MIGRATION The Province of Southern Leyte, although considered the second smallest population share in the region, has a population growth rate of 1.13% which is attributed to the net effect of in-migration and the increase in birth rate over death. This increasing trend is expected to be more evident in two of the five LGU pilot sites more specifically Sogod and Maasin City. The two study sites are considered as the political and financial centers of the province with the two largest numbers of registered businesses engaged in service, retail / wholesale, and transport / communication services which provide employment opportunities to people. The expected growth in population has implication on food demand and the existing practices of upland household residents in terms of natural resource harvesting and extraction as well as the increased pressure to open up more land for cultivation. As brought forward by the finding in this study, one of the pull factors for people to stay in the five study sites is the availability of land vis-à-vis its scarcity in their previous places of origin which prompted them to migrate because they were either landless or did not have security of tenure.

LOW EDUCATION The educational attainment of household heads and their spouses in both the Non- REDD+ and REDD+ study sites are generally within the primary and elementary level. The primary or elementary educational facilities that are the only ones available in the barangays seemed to be directly correlated to the level of education attained by the upland farmers and members of their family. Since farming households can barely afford to send their children to educational institutions outside of their villages, as a consequence, their children who would be future upland farmers themselves would also be expected to have low level of education. The low educational attainment of household heads and their spouses has some implications to the REDD+ project implementation since it indicates that the level of understanding regarding climate change and other environmental problems may not be that high and therefore more educational campaigns and exposure may be necessary for them to appreciate and adopt the innovations to be introduced in the project sites. xvi Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION AND HOUSEHOLD DECISION MAKING The active membership of the majority of farm households to various civic and religious, and other village-level organizations in their respective barangays, including the farm labor oriented self-help group are positive farming dynamics that exist in the study sites which are indicative of active group involvement and participation. This could possibly be considered venue or network that can be tapped in the implementation of natural resources and environment protection programs.

Together with the active participation in community organization, the finding that majority of households wherein the husbands and wives make joint decisions is another important factor to consider since this connote that household decisions are consultative and wives may play the important role of program influencers in the family and community. This finding has relevance and implications in the households’ adoption or participation in REDD+ related activities. That in REDD+ interventions, it is necessary to consider both the husband and the wife’s involvement.

USE OF FUEL WOOD FOR COOKING Although the use of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) for cooking is partly common among certain households in the study sites, the use of fuel wood for home cooking is still dominant among households. According to their claims, they gathered fuel wood from nearby forests, backyards, or from their own farms. In spite of the abundance of coconut which constitute the biggest proportion among the crops grown in the study sites, coconut palm fronds is only used for cooking by more than 20% of the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites. Palm fronds are environment friendly alternative to fuel wood because it minimizes the cutting of trees as firewood. However, it is still alarming to know that fuel wood is still widely used by households for their household cooking needs. Perhaps the availability of sources for fuel wood in the study sites and the continuous increase in the prices of LPG contributed to the intensive use of fuel wood among households in the study area. But whatever the motivation is behind such practice, fuel wood gathering is a critical point to be looked into because this may lead to continuous cutting of more trees in the study sites.

SOURCES AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION With the high availability of electricity in the barangays, the household respondents have varied sources of information. TV and radio are the two most popular sources of information among households and watching TV during early evening until primetime is a popular past time among farmers. To some extent, this also includes carrying radio sets while working in their farms. Newspaper is, however, not a common source of information because Southern Leyte is far from the urban centers where newspapers are widely circulated. Likewise, only a few respondents from Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households mentioned the use of mobile phones in accessing information.

The problem of access to mobile phones in most of the remote and mountainous barangays in Maasin City, Bontoc, Sogod, Tomas Oppus, and Silago in spite of the

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xvii availability of this system in all the municipalities is worthy of consideration. The lack of access to mobile phone communication facilities most especially among upland farming households vis-à-vis the high economic benefit it can generate such as reduced transportation costs and access to updated market and other important information and services seemed to be a lesser priority of local government units (LGUs) and their barangay officials. Existence of such services and facilities could enhance the flow not only of farm and market related information to and from remote areas but also enhances fast and collective community activities such as those related to the environmental and the protection of natural resources.

HOUSEHOLD INCOME Upland farm households in the study sites have varied sources of income classified as farm, off-farm, and non-farm income sources. On the average, the annual income of households from all sources was P118,761 which fall below the annual average income for Southern Leyte (P141,641). Moreover, the average annual income of the Non-REDD+ households was P135,491 which is higher than the sample REDD+ households (P113,136). The relatively lower average annual income from all sources for both the Non-REDD+ and the REDD+ households as compared with the average annual household income for Southern Leyte can be attributed to the fact that the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sample households are located in the upland barangays wherein most households belong to the poorer groups. Moreover, the lower income in REDD+ barangays could be further attributed to the lower non-farm income opportunities of households in these areas owing to their comparatively farther distance to the commercial or trading centers which is not the case with the Non-REDD+ households.

Farm income constitutes about one-third of the total annual household income while a larger proportion of the annual household income is derived from non- farm income particularly among the Non-REDD+ households (P60,451). For the REDD+ households, farm income was much lower (P45,996). The lower income among the REDD+ households is indicative of the lower income opportunities available to them and of the greater pressure on their part to meet their food and other basic household needs. With limited non-farm income and seasonal off-farm income opportunities among the REDD+ households, increasing farm productivity of existing farms or expanding farm area are two alternatives left for them. If farm productivity does not improve, households may scout for additional area to cultivate or expand existing farms which may lead to forest encroachment. Hence, the availability of alternative income sources to augment farm income and lessen the pressure on the forest is a critical program or policy consideration.

By clustering households into low, middle and high income groups the finding illustrated that, aside from earning the highest average farm income, all the sample households in the high income groups earned from other sources of income and the most prominent source was the remittances of family members working abroad. On the other hand, the greater majority of the middle and low income groups earned other sources of income mainly from local remittances of household members who migrated to work in other places within the country. This finding simply shows that xviii Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte the upland farm households in the study sites have various sources of income but the middle and most especially the high income groups can be considered economically well-off and have better alternative income sources and opportunities.

HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURES The average annual family expenditures of households in the Non-REDD+ and the REDD+ sites is P90,242 and P75,348, respectively. This average is lower compared to the average annual family expenditures for the Province of Southern Leyte which is P117,003. Percentage wise, households in both study sites allocated the bulk of their income on food followed by expenses on education, and special occasions. Comparatively, the Non-REDD+ households allocated a lower proportion (57%) of their income to food followed by education (10%) compared with the REDD+ households which allocated 64% of their income to food and only 8% on education. Another important expenditure item of households is on transportation and communication which included expenditures on public transportation as well on landline and / or mobile telephone system which has now become a very important means of communication in the Philippines.

Household expenditures across income groups are varied since lifestyles tend to vary along with increased income. In general, the low income households allocated 63% of its meager income to food and other basic household operating expenses (10.6%). This was followed by expenses on education (8.1%) and special occasions (7.8%). The middle income groups, on the other hand, allocated 50.7% of their income on food followed by other expenses (16.7%) and special occasions (10.6%). In contrast, the high income group of households allocated only (38.4%) of their income on food, followed by other expenses (17.6%), recreation (11.2%), education (11.1%), and special occasions (11.1%). The finding of the study reveal that a decreasing percentage of expenditure is allocated to food while a higher percentage of expenditures to education, special occasions, recreation, and other expenses are allocated by the households as income increases.

MODE OF LAND ACQUISITION At present, the most common mode of land acquisition in the study sites is through inheritance followed by verbal agreement and / or through direct purchase of the land from the original claimant or its rightful owner. In the past, other households acquired lands through government programs like agrarian reform and social forestry, which are the legal basis of land acquisition within the timberland or public domain. For instance, under the agrarian reform program of DAR, EP and CLOA are issued to the beneficiaries who can avail of the Torrens title system. Under the ISFP of the DENR, CSC is issued. Presumably, most of the first wave settlers in the mountain barangays, being part of the public domain where absolute land titling is not possible, must have acquired legal basis of land ownership through this approach. Through the years, ownership or rights may have been transferred to next-of-kin by virtue of inheritance and by verbal agreement with relatives or close family friends when the original holders are no longer able to cultivate their farm parcels due to old age. Some owners ended up selling their lands to other people which is not allowed under the ISF program of the DENR.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xix Rights were also acquired by a few respondents through direct occupancy inside timberland as evident among REDD+ respondents, which is essentially illegal. Occupancy is usually made in areas previously tilled by legal beneficiaries of upland development programs. Other settlers, however, opened up new areas for cultivation inside timberland.

REASONS FOR LANDS NOT BEING TITLED The high cost associated with land titling was the most cited reason by both Non- REDD+ and REDD+ respondents for not having their land titled. One major constraint for titling was the status of the lands they are tilling since some parcels cultivated by households are situated inside timberland or public domain where absolute title is not possible to obtain. Another reason was the long process involved particularly in subdividing lots from the original deed. It is, however, of interest to note that some are still waiting for the release of the title they applied for. This could further substantiate the claim of some respondents that the titling process is tedious and lengthy.

REASONS FOR NOT PLANTING PERENNIAL CROPS Although permanent or perennial crops are integral components of the cropping system for both households in the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites, some did not plant trees in their farms. The primary reason for not planting trees is the perception among farmers that trees would affect coconut production due to shading and nutrient competition. Unavailability of land for planting trees is another reason cited by 20.4% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 23.6% of the REDD+ household respondents. Planting trees would be a long-term investment which is not compatible to their immediate need of income to support household needs as mentioned by 10.2% and 21.7% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents, respectively (Table 101). This further reinforced the effect of land tenure on farmer’s decision to plant trees because without a secured tenure, the probability of benefitting from the trees they planted is nil. The result demonstrates that aside from the lack of available space for tree planting, respondents are more concerned on safeguarding coconut which is their principal cash crop. Others consider tree planting as a long-term investment the benefit of which is uncertain compared to the immediate benefits of short-term investments. In some cases involving tenant- cultivators, the owner of the land determines which crop to be cultivated in the farm.

REASONS FOR NOT CULTIVATING THE LAND While almost all of the sample households in both study sites are cultivating farm lands, it is interesting to note that some reportedly did not actively cultivate certain farm lots or farm parcels during the survey. The primary reason for this was the lack of farm labor from the household. As the first generation of cultivators starts to age, no member from the households are willing to take responsibility of doing farm chores most probably because they are already engaged in more productive economic ventures or not interested to follow the footsteps of their parents. Some xx Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte respondents also allow their farms to fallow, to allow continuously cropped farms to regenerate for some time. Some respondents also subjected their abaca farm under fallow after the “bunchy top” virus infestation. Some did not cultivate their lands because of financial and physical constraint considering the distance of their upland farm from their residence. Hence, the existing scenario somehow provides a practical and ecological solution to the denudation problems in the uplands. As aging farmers are unable to find younger successors and as financial constraints limit the capacity of some farmers to cultivate their lands, there is greater probability that some upland farms would be abandoned for several production cycles and thus, could regenerate naturally over time. A reverse scenario where high income households that cultivate many parcels of land could exploit the situation by renting out or buying these idle lands, cultivating these lands, and earning more profit for themselves may also be possible.

HOUSEHOLDS WHO LOST LAND DUE TO LACK OF PROOF OF OWNERSHIP Majority of the respondents in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites claimed they never heard of households who lost land due to lack of proof of ownership. A number, however, admitted they rarely heard of such cases while very few said they regularly heard of cases like that. This finding seemed to show that concrete proof of ownership, which can be translated into security, is not as important as the visible improvement of their farms which may serve as monumental evidence of ownership or signify the right of occupancy. Hence, in cases where absolute title is not possible to obtain, the presence of perennial crops like coconut which is tantamount to occupancy is provisionally understood and respected by most people in the upland barangays aside from the fact that cases of illegal occupants being ejected from their occupied land was rarely heard of due to laxity of the concerned agencies implementing the laws.

PARTICIPATION IN ENVIRONMENT ACTIVITIES A larger majority of households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites are involved in environment-related activities and the most participated activity cited by respondents included tree planting and community clean-up. Old age, no interest, busy schedule, and no available time are among the other reasons for the non-participation in this activity. Almost all of the households argued that it is their desire to protect the well-being of the whole community and promote cleanliness and this motivated them to join environment oriented organizations.

Almost all of the households in the REDD+ sites and a large majority of those in the Non-REDD+ study sites expressed their willingness to participate in environmental activities in the future. The willingness to be involved in future environmental- related activities of most households especially those in the REDD+ study sites has significant implications on the stakeholders’ reception and adoption of the REDD+ activities and intervention to be implemented in the pilot sites.

ACCESS TO NATURAL RESOURCES Majority of the REDD+ and below one-half of the Non-REDD+ respondents

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xxi had access to natural resources. This difference can be explained by relative physical locations of the households in the two study sites. Understandably, REDD+ communities are situated closer to the forests and access to forests from residence or from farm is made possible generally by trail being the only available means of access to the site. However, field observations in addition to interviews indicate that accessibility to the sources of the naturally occurring plants and wildlife resources is generally difficult, thus preventing massive exploitation of resources.

TIMBER HARVESTING A greater proportion of the respondents were not aware of timber harvesting activities in the area but a number who claimed to be aware of it mentioned an array of timber species being cut in the area. In most cases, lumber are sold to immediate neighborhood and in neighboring barangays for local construction purposes and to various furniture shops and lumber traders in the town and / or city proper.

Topping the list of timber harvested for home-based construction use and for trade were generally the planted exotic species like yemane and mahogany. However, also topping the list were banned premium timber species like narra and molave including lauan, a dipterocarp species which is traded for general construction use. It is not surprising if people are harvesting yemane and mahogany because these species have become the icons of reforestation in the country and are widely acceptable. What is disturbing to note is the continuous harvesting and trading of banned premium timber species, the bulk of which must come from the remaining forest fragments. The result connotes that such illegal activity continues because violators may be provisionally allowed to do so by authorities for humanitarian consideration or because of low detection rate owing to laxity on the side of the regulatory agency.

AWARENESS ON RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH DEFORESTATION A significant proportion of the respondents in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites perceived a decreasing scale of deforestation. Conversely, a lower proportion perceived an increasing scale while a much lower proportion perceived deforestation to have stayed the same. This decreasing scale of deforestation as perceived by respondents could be attributed to the fact that not many people are seen cutting trees anymore practically because there are no more trees to cut within the vicinity of the barangay. Stocks of timber could only be found in forest remnants which are located far from the barangay, thus harvesting is technically difficult and economically not feasible.

PERCEIVED REASONS FOR DEFORESTATION The most perceived reasons for deforestation were increased consumption of timber, increased demand for agricultural land and population pressure. The first two reasons are direct consequences of increasing population pressure on forestland through illegal harvesting and illegal occupancy. If the trend is unabated, coupled with lack of law enforcement, the problem is expected to intensify in the future even if people continue to perceive a decreasing rate of deforestation. xxii Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte AWARENESS ON RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION A great majority of the respondents were aware of the risk associated with environmental degradation. For the past five years, respondents experienced or encountered environmental risks associated with the occurrences of La Niña, drought, increase in temperature and flooding, and landslides due to strong typhoons. Other frequently encountered risks were soil erosion, depletion of food and water supply, and earthquake.

As regards to specific actions to be done during natural calamities such as La Niña, drought, increase in temperature, and earthquake, an overwhelming majority cited passive submission to the will of nature. For soil erosion, the most common coping mechanism was planting trees. For floods due to typhoons, the most common suggested action was to conduct environmental cleanup to clear drainage of debris.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte xxiii

1 Project Background

The growing awareness of the link between economic development, forest destruction, climate change and loss of biodiversity calls for an intervention to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+) in developing countries like the Philippines. ‘REDD-plus’ or ‘REDD+’ is a strategy which ‘creates financial value for the carbon stored in forests.’ This will encourage ‘developing countries to reduce emissions from deforestation and invest in low-carbon paths.’ (UN 2009). REDD+ also includes conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks through a multi-stakeholder engagement.

The project Climate-Relevant Modernization of the National Forest Policy and Piloting of REDD+ Measures in the Philippines is designed towards this end. With funding from the International Climate Protection Initiative of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment (BMU), it is implemented by the GIZ and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) with the cooperation of local government units (LGUs) and other stakeholders within the framework of the National REDD Strategy (NRPS).

The project aims for the (1) improvement of forest policy and development of incentives for forest protection and rehabilitation, (2) reduction of greenhouse gases, (3) conservation of biodiversity, and (4) building of capacities. Thus, the project is concerned with policy reforms and piloting of REDD in and around selected protected areas in the country. It recognizes the significance of establishing co-management agreements with local communities which can be integrated into the NRPS.

The island of Leyte was selected for the pilot implementation of REDD measures. Selected pilot villages or barangays in five municipalities of Southern Leyte served as the project area. As the first phase of the project, this study established baseline data and information which will serve as benchmark in determining the impacts of the project interventions on people’s livelihood. Project impacts will be determined through a socio-economic impact analysis that adheres to international standards, specifically those of the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA). Thus, this study delved into crucial socio-economic parameters such as basic socio-economic information of the project region, access to land, agricultural land use, natural forest and forest plantations, market information, and education, health service and infrastructures in the pilot barangays.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 1 1 1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT

The major objective of the study was to establish a socio-economic baseline for the post-evaluation and socio-economic impact assessment for the pilot barangays. In particular, the study aimed to:

1. describe the pre-project socio-economic conditions at the REDD+ pilot project sites; and 2. describe the socio-economic conditions of selected Non-REDD+ sites or control sites.

1.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study is guided by the G1.5-6 Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) Standards considered as the “Original Conditions in the Project Area”. Based on the G1 sub-section, the study aimed to gather community information, which included: a) a description of communities located in and around the project area, including basic socioeconomic information, and b) a description of current land use and land tenure at the project site.

In order to determine the baseline for the socioeconomic conditions in the project area, data and information from within the identified pilot sites as well as in selected areas outside of the pilot sites were collected. Among others, the following data and information were considered (TOR 2010):

• basic demographic and cultural information, as well as information about agricultural and forest land use; • overall characterization of the households in terms of their demographics, education level, access to production resources and the utilized farming systems; • description of communities located in the project zone, including basic socio-economic and cultural information that describes the social, economic and cultural diversity within communities (wealth, gender, age, ethnicity etc.); • identification and description of specific groups such as Indigenous Peoples and community characteristics; • description of current land use and customary and legal property rights including community property in the project zone; and • description of any ongoing or unresolved conflicts or disputes including disputes over land tenure that were resolved during the last ten years.

2 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 2 Methodology

To establish the baseline socio-economic conditions of the study area as provided in the G.1.5-6 of the CCBA Standards, the study attempted to address the following wide ranging data and information:

Basic socio-economic information. Demographic and socio-economic information, including population size, distribution, density, growth rate, migration trends, topographical location, economic activities, employment situations for both on and off-farm employment, average household income differentiated into farm and off-farm income as well as income from the forest (natural forests and plantations), average living expenditures, primary and secondary occupations, household members, household decision-making and gender roles, conflict resolution mechanisms, and food security are presented in the study.

Access to land. Information regarding land tenure, land ownership, legal status of cultivation, customary and legal property rights (including community property in the project zone), identification of ongoing or unresolved conflicts or disputes, and identification and description of disputes over land tenure is presented in the study.

Information about agricultural land use. Information about agricultural production systems, including main crops grown, yields, intensity of land use, crop rotation practices, intercropping practices, agricultural cultivation areas, access to crop rotation practices access to agricultural extension services, seasonal calendars of work, farm practices (e.g., slash and burn practice, soil preparation, plant protection and harvesting), existing plant diseases and pests, use of fertilizers and agro-chemicals (e.g., herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides), livestock, use of machinery, and proposed land use changes are presented in the study.

Information about natural forests and forest plantations. Information about main drivers of deforestation and forest degradation (i.e., agricultural land expansion, new settlements, income generation from wood selling), use of wood (i.e., for energy purposes or material purposes), marketing of wood and other forest products, and prices and marketing channels are presented. Information on plantation forests, perspectives for planting and management of planted forests are also included.

Market information. This includes actual market prices and price development of cultivated crops, road access, selling and retailer structure, access to markets and transport infrastructure.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 3 2 Education, health services, and infrastructure. Access to education, distance to schools, literacy rates, access to electricity, household energy (for cooking / heating), water sources, access to and sources of credit, and access to technologically and economically relevant information are presented in the study.

2.1 SAMPLING SCHEME The sampling population of the study included those household-residents whose livelihoods are mainly or partly dependent upon the natural resources in the five pilot barangays. The following formula was used to determine the sample size obtained using simple random sampling:

(1)

where refers to the sample size to be determined, is the confidence interval, is the population variance and e refers to the margin of error.

The study employed a 99% confidence interval which means that the sample is certain 99% of the time. The established Z-value for 99% confidence interval is 2.585. With regards to the population variance ( ), no prior information was available. However, this was estimated using the proportion of the sample that responded to a particular question or the percentage of the sample that chose an option. It was assumed that the proportion is 0.5 since there was limited information available about the population variance. A 0.5 proportion is a worst case assumption while closer to 1 is the best case assumption. For the margin of error, 5% was employed. This means that the population is within +5 of the estimates. Using these values, the sample size ( ) was determined as follows (Creative Research System, 2011):

It is necessary to adjust the computed sample size given that the population figure is finite. To adjust the computed sample size, the following formula was used.

(2)

where is the required sample size or the adjusted sample size, is the initial sample size computed using formula 1, and N is the population considered. The population in this study is the total number of households within the project area. The total number of households in the project sites was 5,497. Using formula 2, the required sample size for households within the area covered was computed as follows:

A total of 597 households were proportionately allocated and randomly selected from the pilot barangays in the five municipalities covered by the REDD+ project. In determining the names of household heads interviewed, the following procedure was adopted:

4 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte a. a list of household heads was availed from the Municipal / City Planning and 2 Development Offices (MPDOs) or from concerned barangay officials; b. random sampling procedure was conducted using SPSS or MS Excel to make sure that every household is given equal chance to be selected; and c. sample households were drawn in every barangay as alternatives in cases where the primary selected households cannot be contacted or if the households refused to cooperate in the study.

Table 1 summarizes the number of barangays and the actual number of households which were selected and interviewed. From a total of 71 barangays covered, 261 households in Bontoc, 121 households in Maasin City, 18 households in Silago, 142 households in Sogod and 55 households in Tomas Oppus were interviewed.

Table 1. Number of barangays and households interviewed in REDD+ areas Municipality / City Number of Barangays* Households Interviewed in REDD+ areas Bontoc 30 261 Maasin 14 121 Silago 4 18 Sogod 16 142 Tomas Oppus 7 55 Total 71 597 *Please refer to Appendix Table 1

For the non-pilot sites, 21 barangays with comparatively similar socio-economic, farming and physical characteristics to the REDD+ barangays within the five municipalities were purposively selected. Using a similar approach employed in the REDD+ pilot sites, 200 households were randomly selected. Using this approach, 57 households in Bontoc, 17 households in Tomas Oppus, 38 households in Sogod, 79 households in Maasin City and 9 households in Silago were interviewed (Table 2).

Table 2. Number of barangays and households interviewed in Non-REDD+ areas Municipality / City Number of Barangays* No. of Households Bontoc 5 57 Maasin 5 79 Silago 2 9 Sogod 5 38 Tomas Oppus 4 17 Total 21 200 *Please refer to Appendix Table 2

2.2 DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE

Structured questionnaires were used in interviews to collect the data from farm households in the pilot barangays. For comparison and for future project related

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 5 2 assessment and evaluation, the study likewise conducted a parallel survey among households in non-pilot barangays not covered by the project.

2.3 FORMULATION OF DATA INSTRUMENT AND PRE-TESTING

A workshop attended by members of the project was conducted to formulate the questionnaire / interview schedule used in the study. The questionnaire was designed in coordination with the designated GIZ-REDD+ project staff in order to include all the basic socio-economic information in the project area, access to land, information on agricultural land use, natural forest condition and plantations, market information, education, health services and infrastructure. Specifically, the survey collected relevant information about the variables identified in item 1 as indicated in the project terms of reference (TOR) for the conduct of the socio- economic baseline study of the REDD+ pilot project in Southern Leyte.

The first draft of the questionnaire was first sent to GIZ for comments and suggestions and was subsequently revised. It was then pre-tested by the project team and two enumerators in a barangay in Sogod, Southern Leyte. After the pre-test of the data instrument, further revisions were made incorporating the results and feedback from the pre-test.

2.4 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection. Nine field enumerators were hired to conduct field interviews among identified households. Prior to the actual field interviews, the enumerators were oriented with the questionnaire for them to be familiar with it. Several mock surveys were also done. The field interviews were conducted from May 11, 2011 to June 29, 2011.

Data management and analysis. After the survey was completed, six (6) data encoders were hired to encode the data into the computers. Encoded data and information were then verified and validated.

Data tabulation and analysis in this study was accomplished using the Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences (SPSS). To compare between the pilot and non- pilot sites, the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ stratification variable was mainly used as basis for all the major data tabulation in the study. Moreover, supplementary analysis was made by clustering all the household respondents into three income clusters, namely: low income, middle income, and high income group. The clustering used was based on the study of Virola, et.al. (2007) which made use of cluster analysis to identify income clusters using the nationwide Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) data. Adopting the income ranges identified in Virola, et. al. (2007) with minor modifications, the following income clusters were employed in the study: a) low income households – those with annual gross income less than P230,189, b) middle income households – those with annual gross income between Php230,189

6 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte to Php614,741, and c) high income households – those with annual gross income 2 greater than Php614,741.

2.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study aimed to provide a comprehensive set of information that fully describes the wide ranging set of socio-economic conditions of households who were mainly or partly dependent on upland land resources for their livelihood. In an attempt to fulfill the study objectives, the following limitations surfaced:

1. The study made use of a comprehensive set of data collecting instruments to extract information from heads of households and / or their spouses. The reliability of data collected was dependent on the honesty of the respondents in providing accurate information as well as their ability to recall past practices and activities most especially those information related to income and expenditures;

2. The 19 pages data collecting instrument employed to collect the data and information seemed to have affected the accuracy and completeness of the data collected from the top income groups of households with many farm parcels and non-farm activities perhaps due to the complexity of their household operations and / or the fatigue on the part of the respondents;

3. Although prior screening and short listing was made to evaluate the qualification of the enumerators in the study, the accuracy of data and information collected was also influenced by their ability, honesty, and thoroughness in conducting the interviews; and

4. The representativeness of the measures such as means and medians mainly depend on the distributions of the economic variables such as incomes and expenditures.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 7

3 Background of Southern Leyte

3.1 NATURAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Southern Leyte is one of the six provinces of Eastern Visayas Region which covers the southern tip of the Leyte Island. It is bounded to the north by the Province of Leyte, Surigao to the east, Sea to the south, and to the west is the . It is the second smallest province in the region in terms of land area and population. The total land area of Southern Leyte is 173,480 hectares (ha.) which accounts for 8% of the total land area of the region. It is also characterized by relatively flat lands along coastal areas that turn rugged and mountainous towards the interior part. The province rest within the Philippine Fault System and the major fault lines run through the municipalities of Sogod, , St. Bernard and San Juan to . According to the Bureau of Mines and Geosciences, the natural and geological features of the province make it vulnerable to landslide and flooding.

Water resources are abundant in this province. It has two principal rivers, Subang Dako in Sogod and Hinabian in Silago which provided water supply for household, agricultural and other industrial uses. The Hinabian in Silago and Lawigan Forest Reserve in St. Bernard serve as watershed in the province. The water system covers 89.88% of the province’s irrigable area. Another kind of body of water which is a rich source of coastal and marine resources or products is the . It is one of the 20 fishery areas in the region with high production potentials.

The province plays a crucial role in the Philippine economy being an important part of the inter-island transportation system of the country. Ferries transport people and goods from the ports of Maasin, Liloan, and to in and vice versa as well as to other Visayan provinces like Bohol. It plays another important economic role as the major producer of abaca fiber in the country. Southern Leyte is well known for its quality abaca products.

Southern Leyte is apportioned into 19 LGUs which are, in turn, subdivided into 18 municipalities and 1 city which is Maasin City. Barangays or villages around the province summed up to 501. Maasin City serves as the center of governance, commerce, and finance. Figure 1 shows the geographic location of Southern Leyte Province and the five pilot study sites.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 9 3

Figure 1. Map of Southern Leyte showing the five study sites

3.2 DEMOGRAPHICS

Population size, growth, and density. Southern Leyte has a population of 390,847 with 1.13% growth rate as of 2007. This population is classified into different ethnic groups: Bisaya, Boholano, Cebuano, Tagalog, Waray and foreign ethnicities. It has a population density of 168.4 persons per square kilometer (sq. m) and the average household (HH) size is 4.7 members. Three major portions of its population are distributed in Maasin City (79,737), Sogod (39,864) and Bontoc (28,535). These three LGUs form part of the five pilot sites for the REDD+ project.

The province may have the second smallest population share in the region, yet it has an increasing population growth rate which can be attributed to in-migration and the increase in birth rate over death (PPP, 2010-2015). This increasing trend is evident in the five LGU pilot sites of Bontoc, Maasin, Silago, Sogod and Tomas Oppus.

Bontoc has a total land area of 102.1 sq km which covers 5.9% of the total land area of the province (Table 3). It has a population of 28,535 as of 2007 and a population density of 279.5 people per sq km. Maasin City has a land area of 197.8 sq km which comprises 11.4% of Southern Leyte. Its population grew to 79,737 in

10 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 2007 with a population density of 403.1 people per sq km. Silago has a total land 3 area of 195.8 sq km which occupies 11.3% of Southern Leyte. It has a population of 11,163 in 2007 and a population density of 57 people per sq km. Sogod covers a total area of 192.7 sq km which is equivalent to 11.1% of Southern Leyte’s total land area. Its population reached 39,864 in 2007 with a population density of 206.9 people per sq km. Finally, Tomas Oppus has the smallest land area among the five geographical units — 85 sq km. In 2007 its population reached 15,817 with a population density of 186.1 people per sq km.

Table 3. Population, population growth rate, density and land area in the Pilot Sites (2007) TOTAL POPULATION Annual Population LAND AREA DENSITY Municipality FOR THE YEAR 2007 Growth Rate (APGR) No. % (2000-2007) (sq km) % 2007 Bontoc 28,535 7.3 0.48 102.1 5.9 279.5 Maasin 79,737 20.4 1.64 197.8 11.4 403.1 Silago 11,163 2.9 0.90 195.8 11.3 57.0 Sogod 39,864 10.2 0.91 192.7 11.1 206.9 Tomas Oppus 15,817 4.1 0.83 85.0 4.9 186.1 Southern Leyte 390,847 100.0 1.17 1,734.8 100.0 225.3 APGR = (X-1) * 100, where: X = antilog [log(Pt / Po)] / t, Po = actual total population, previ- ous Pt = actual total population, current, and t = time between Pt and Po Source: NCSO

Silago may be the second largest site in terms of land area but it has the smallest population. Maasin City, on the other hand, has the largest land area and the highest population characteristic of urban areas as, often, the movement of people point towards developed areas. The increasing pattern of population has important policy and program implication as it may exert pressure upon available resources, land area and services and ultimately on the quality of life for the residents of the community.

Poverty incidence. Southern Leyte is one of the least impoverished provinces in the region. The poverty incidence of families in the province based in 2009 data is 30.3, i.e. 30.3 of 100 families in the province are poor, which is lower than the regional incidence of 33.2. However, despite this low poverty incidence, a comparison of 2009 and 2006 rates noted a 7.7% increase in poverty Figure 2. Region 8 poverty incidence for incidence of families which is the 2006 and 2009 (Adopted from NSO) second highest incidence increase in the region (Eastern is the first at 8.2%). The subsistence incidence of the province as of 2009 is 10.1 which is lower compared to the regional incidence of

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 11 3 14.4 (NSCB, 2011, Fig. 2). This means that 10.1 out of 100 families in the province are not able to meet the basic daily food requirement.

Family income and expenditure. The National Statistics Office conducts a Family Income and Expenditures Survey every three years. Data gathered on the FIES are income and living expenditures of households, and patterns and information that affect the income and expenditure levels in the country. As of 2009, the average annual income of families in Southern Leyte was estimated at P141,641, higher by 21.6 percent from P116,425 in 2006 (NSCB). Meanwhile, the annual family expenditure of the province reached P117,003 in 2009, which increased by 14 percent within the 3-year period. The estimates of income and expenditures resulted to the average annual savings of the family. The annual family savings in Southern Leyte was P24,611 in 2009, which is higher compared to P14,222 in 2006.

Table 4. Average annual income and expenditure of families in Eastern Visayas, 2009 Ave. Annual Income Ave. Annual Expenditure Province 2009 2006 2009 2006 130,115 114,649 112,749 113,952 Leyte 178,397 125,293 138,415 103,660 137,606 116,272 114,219 100,271 Samar 134,968 119,134 110,808 97,220 Southern Leyte 141,614 116,425 117,003 102,203 237,761 167,126 184,597 131,461 Source: NSO

Distribution and movement. Migration often points towards developing and developed areas. The rate of out-migration of Eastern Visayas for the period 1995- 2000 is 10.48 percent and is considered high. The high rate of out-migration is identified as one of the reasons for low population rate in the region. However, in Southern Leyte, out-migration rate is the lowest among the provinces of Eastern Visayas with the percentage of 4.66. This means that 46 persons go out of the province for every 1,000 population. The net migration in Southern Leyte is only 1.513 persons (DA RFU 8, 2004).

Human development. In terms of human development, the province’s elementary net enrollment ratio and basic literacy rate is still far from the MDG commitment to attain 100% in these two criteria. Yet, throughout the region, the province with the highest literacy rate is Southern Leyte with the percentage of 92.2 as of May 2000 Census. The province performance in cohort survival rate, both for elementary and secondary education for school year 2010-2011, was the highest in the region with the rate of 86% and 74.9%, respectively.

12 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 3

Figure 3. Proportion of children aged 6-12 years old who are not attending Elementary School (Adopted from 2008 CBMS Survey)

3.3 CROP PRODUCTION IN THE PILOT SITES

In character with the Eastern Visayan lowlands, the Southern Leyte lowlands is endowed with rich land resources such as fertile soil, abundant water and wet climate which are suitable for agriculture. Hence, the province is a primary producer of traditional crops such as coconut, rice and abaca. As one, the province played an important role in making Eastern Visayas the second biggest producer of coconut in the country (2 billion nuts) in 2009. As for rice, Southern Leyte was the third biggest rice producer in the region for 2009 and 2010.

Southern Leyte reportedly produced 17,009 metric tons (M.T.) of rice, 13,323 M.T. of coconut and 1,152 M.T. of abaca fiber during the second quarter of the year 2011. However, it must be noted that, as in a number of provinces in the region, the coconut and abaca plantations in the province are affected by the “brontispa” disease and the abaca bunchy top virus (ABTV), respectively which affected crop health and yield. Without these diseases, with other factors held constant, it can be assumed that a higher coconut and abaca production can be achieved.

Coconut production. Southern Leyte is the one of the three provinces in the region that devoted more than 50% of its alienable and disposable (A&D) land to agriculture. As it shows, Bontoc has 4,104 ha of coconut land, (owner-operated: 1,642; tenanted: 2,462); Maasin has 5,703 ha (owner-operated: 2,281; tenanted:

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 13 3 3,422); Silago has 5,247 ha (owner-operated: 2,099; tenanted: 3,148); Sogod has 4,680 ha (owner-operated: 1,792; tenanted: 2,888); and Tomas Oppus has 1,532 ha (owner-operated: 613; tenanted: 919). Throughout the sites, the tenanted coconut land accounts for 60% of the total coconut land which can be attributed to a number of factors.

First, most coconut land owners in the region have other means of livelihood and they prefer to hire people to manage their farms. Secondly, some land owners may have migrated to other places so that they need another person to directly oversee the farm. Thirdly, coconut production covers the recurrent processes of land preparation, cultural management, harvesting, copra processing and marketing. Thus, plantation owners employ other farmers to relieve themselves of some of these tasks. Fourthly, some plantation owners and tenants are bound by loyalty and a sense of family which are characteristic of Filipinos that their heirs would not wish to alter the working arrangement that have spanned for generations. In a mainly agrarian economy that characterizes rural Philippines, these scenarios are common.

Because coconut production is one of the economically profitable enterprises in the province, a number of people are encouraged to engage in coco farming. Among the pilot sites, Bontoc has the most number of coco farmers (9,897) followed by Maasin City (4,437), Sogod (3,161), Tomas Oppus (2,760) and Silago (1,950) (Table 5). The year 2000 alone reported a 4,104 ha area of land planted to coconut in Bontoc with a coconut production of 2,365 M.T. at an average yield of 0.6 M.T. per ha. In Maasin City where coconut plantations reached 5,703 ha, coconut production was 3,356 M.T. with an average yield of 0.6 M.T. per ha. In Silago, the area planted to coconut is 5,247 ha with a coconut production of 1,775 M.T. at an average yield per hectare of 0.3 M.T. Sogod with 4,481 ha of coconut plantation reached a production of 2,036 M.T. with an average yield of 0.5 M.T. per ha. Lastly, Tomas Oppus with 1,532 ha of coconut plantation produced 833 M.T. of nuts at an average of 0.5 M.T. per hectare.

Rice production. The Philippines, in general, is one of the rice producing and rice consuming countries in the world. Consequently, rice farming is not just a means of livelihood but a way of life around which numerous beliefs, rituals, narratives and economic hopes are constructed. A significant portion of Southern Leyte’s economic activity also revolves around rice production. In 2008, 1,740 ha of rice area were harvested in Bontoc; 1,979.6 ha in Maasin City; 953 ha in Silago; 1,442 ha in Sogod; and 324.5 ha in Tomas Oppus. In Bontoc, the volume of production in M.T. was 6,710.6 with 3.9 M.T. of yield per ha; 6,397.5 M.T. with 3.2 M.T of yield per ha in Maasin City; 4,211.1 M.T. with 4.4 M.T. yield per ha in Silago; 6,708.8 M.T. with 4.7 M.T. yield per ha in Sogod; and 1,246.7 M.T. with 3.8 M.T. yield per ha (Table 6).

14 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 5. Land status of coconut land (2002), coconut production and average yield 3 (MT / ha) for 2000 in the pilot sites Owner- Total Area % Tenanted Production Ave. Yield No. of Coco Municipality Tenanted Operated (Ha.) Coco Land (M.T.) / Hectare Farmers Bontoc 1,642 2,462 4,104 60 2,365 0.6 9,897 Maasin 2,281 3,422 5,703 60 3,356 0.6 4,437 Silago 2,099 3,148 5,247 60 1,775 0.3 1,950 Sogod 1,792 2,888 4,680 62 2,036 0.5 3,161 Tomas Oppus 613 919 1,532 60 833 0.5 2,760 Source: PCA Provincial Office, Maasin City, Southern Leyte

Table 6. Rice production, area harvested, yield / ha. in the pilot sites for 2008 % Share to Total % Share to Area Vol. of Production Yield / Ha. Municipality Provincial Area Total Provincial Harvested, Ha. M.T. (M.T.) Harvested Production Bontoc 1,740.0 6,710.6 3.9 9.6 8.9 Maasin 1,979.6 6,397.5 3.2 10.9 8.5 Silago 953.0 4,211.1 4.4 5.2 5.6 Sogod 1,442.0 6,708.8 4.7 7.9 8.9 Tomas Oppus 324.5 1,246.7 3.8 1.8 1.7 Source: OPAG Provincial Office, Maasin City, Southern Leyte

3.4 BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS

When employment in agriculture, fishery and forestry sector declined in the 80’s, the province saw a rise in the service and industry sectors. By the time employment in the agriculture, fishery and forestry sector accelerated in the 90’s to 2003, Southern Leyte’s primarily agricultural economy is complemented with the growth of businesses. For example, from the period of 2005 to 2009, the Provincial Office of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) noted the establishment of bakeries, hollow block manufacturers, furniture manufacturers along with unclassified manufacturing establishments in the province including the pilot municipalities (Table 7).

Table 7. Number of manufacturing establishments in the pilot site from 2005 to 2009 Municipality Bakery Hollow Blocks Furniture Others Total Bontoc 8 9 8 3 28 Maasin 44 11 3 48 106 Silago 3 2 5 Sogod 18 6 10 22 56 Tomas Oppus 2 1 3 1 7 Source: DTI Provincial Office, Maasin City, Southern Leyte

A number of people are employed in these businesses (Table 8). For example, Maasin City, as the political and financial center of the Province of Southern Leyte has the largest number of registered business firm engaged in service (1,763), retail /

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 15 3 wholesale (1,717) and transport / communications (221) enterprise which provided employment opportunities to people. Sogod has the second highest number of registered business firms generating employment for its residents while attracting other people from the nearby areas to form part of its growing labor force. Tomas Oppus, the smallest LGU among the pilot sites has the smallest number of registered service-related firms but surpassed Silago in terms of the number of registered retail / wholesale and transport / communication firms.

Table 8. Number of employment-generating firms in the pilot sites MUNICIPALITIES Employment-Generating Firms Bontoc Maasin Silago Sogod Tomas Oppus Total Service-related Firms 98 1,763 32 707 20 Electric / Gas / Water Providers 2 27 11 Finance Firms 28 269 9 75 Boarding House 78 35 1 Building / Lot Rentals 70 94 2 Hotels and Lodging Houses 77 27 Beach Resorts 18 2 21 Social / Personal Services 5 53 28 Not Specified 63 1,171 21 416 17 Wholesale / Retail 87 1,717 154 1,028 56 Transport / Communications 27 221 20 83 24 Source: DTI Provincial Office, Maasin City, Southern Leyte

3.5 PHYSICAL RESOURCES AND EXISTING LAND USE

Southern Leyte has no great landholdings. Southern Leyte’s total land area (173,480 ha) can be classified into forest land and alienable and disposable land (A&D). As such, its forest land amounted to 47,519 ha which is 27.4% of the province’s total land area. This portion of its land area accounts for 4.25% of the region’s total forest land. On the other hand, the province’s A&D land amounted to 125,961 ha which is 72.6% of its total land area. Its A&D is further utilized as production land and built-up areas. The production land is devoted to cultivation of annual crops, irrigated rice, perennial trees and vine crops and aquaculture (fishpond).

Land classification of pilot sites. Based on the data from the PENRO-DENR, OPA, and LGU CLUPs of Southern Leyte from 1993-2002 (Table 9), Bontoc has 10,210 hectares (ha) of total land area, of which 6,389 ha are classified as A&D land while the remaining 3,821 ha are timberland. Maasin City has a total land area of 19,780 ha which are divided into 16,164 ha of A&D land and 3,616 ha of timberland. Silago is second to Maasin City in size with an area of 19,580 ha which are apportioned into 14,934 ha of A&D land and 4,646 ha of timberland. Sogod is the third largest LGU with a total land area of 19,270 ha with 15,112 ha of A&D land and 4,158 ha of timberland. Tomas Oppus has the smallest land area among the five LGUs with 5,114 ha of A&D and 3,386 ha of timberland. Except for Tomas Oppus, Maasin City, being the political and economic center of Southern

16 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Leyte has the smallest timberland area. On the other hand, Silago has the largest 3 area of timberland and remains one of the biodiversity frontiers in the region.

Land suitability and protected land in the pilot sites. The total land area of each of these sites is classified further in terms of their suitability and non-suitability for agriculture, marine and agro-forestry use (Table 10). For example, Bontoc has 7,073 ha of suitable area which are utilized as / for irrigated riceland (812 ha), rainfed riceland (52 ha), cultivated annual crops (2,392.8 ha), perennial tree and vine crops (2,881 ha), fishpond (brackish: 6 ha; freshwater: 3.3 ha), production forest (native: 511 ha), CBFM (400.5 ha) and pasture (15 ha). Maasin has 17,002 ha of area suitable for irrigated riceland (599 ha), rainfed riceland (417 ha), cultivated annual crops (6,145 ha), perennial tree and vine crops (7,835 ha), fishpond (brackish: 69 ha; freshwater: 6 ha), forestry plantation (785 ha), production forest (556 ha), CBFM (557.7 ha), and upland riceland (32 ha). Silago has 17,767 ha of area suitable for irrigated riceland (475 ha), rainfed riceland (5 ha), cultivated annual crops (6,608 ha), perennial tree and vine crops (7,663 ha), forestry plantation (exotic: 250 ha), production forest (native: 896 ha) and CBFM (1,868 ha). Sogod has 17,693 ha suited to irrigated riceland (709 ha), rainfed riceland (10 ha), cultivated annual crops (7,094 ha), perennial tree and vine crops (6,853 ha), fishpond (freshwater: 1.2 ha), production forest (native: 874 ha) and CBFM (2,152 ha). Tomas Oppus, on the other hand, has 5,727 ha of suitable area for irrigated riceland (100 ha), rainfed riceland (85 ha), perennial tree and vine crops (2,289.6 ha), fishpond (brackish: 2,536.8 ha), forestry plantation (exotic: 8.4 ha), production forest (native: 256 ha) and pasture (451.1 ha).

Across the five pilot sites, a bigger part of the total suitable land is most suited for the cultivation of annual crops and perennial vine crops. In Sogod, for example, the area suitable for cultivated annual crops is 46.1% of its total area which is suitable for use. Maasin City also has 46.1% of its total suitable area deemed conducive to perennial tree and vine crops. Sogod and Silago have 12.2% and 10.5% of land suitable for CBFM, respectively. Furthermore, Tomas Oppus (32.6%) and Bontoc (30.7%) have the biggest percentage of area identified not suitable for use among the pilot sites.

Table 9. Land classification of the pilot sites Alienable and Total Land Area Municipality Timberland Disposable Land (in hectares) Bontoc 6,389 3,821 10,210 Maasin 16,164 3,616 19,780 Silago 14,934 4,646 19,580 Sogod 15,112 4,158 19,270 Tomas Oppus 5,114 3,386 8,500 Sources: DENR, PENRMO, OPAG, LGU CLUPs, PPFP-So. Leyte 1993-2002

Protected lands. Bontoc has 5,181 ha of protected lands subdivided into 3,198 ha of Non-NIPAS and 1,983 ha of NPAAD highly restricted agricultural land (Table 11). The total non-NIPAS area is further divided into slope greater than

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 17 3 50% (1,580 ha) mangrove forests (20 ha) and buffer strips (1,598 ha). Maasin City has 6,000 hectares of protected lands which are subdivided into non-NIPAS (3,682 ha) and NPAAD highly restricted agricultural land (2,318 ha). The non-NIPAS area consisted of 1,815 ha of slope greater than 50%, 97 ha mangrove forests and 1,770 ha buffer strips. Silago has 10,021 ha of protection lands, 9,123 ha of which are classified non-NIPAS and 898 ha are NPAAD high restricted agricultural land. The non-NIPAS area is composed of 6,165 ha of land with slope greater than 50% slope, 18 ha of mangrove forests and 2,940 ha of buffer strips. The municipality of Sogod has 19,378 ha of protection lands of which 15,447 ha are non-NIPAS and 3,931 ha are NPAAD highly restricted agricultural land. The non-NIPAS are divided further into 13,629 ha of slope greater than 50%, 6 ha of mangrove forests and 1,812 ha of buffer strips. Finally, Tomas Oppus has 3,434 ha of total protection lands which made up 1,294 ha of non-NIPAs and 2,140 ha of NPAAD highly restricted agricultural land. The former is divided into 653 ha of slope greater than 50%, 2 ha of mangrove forests and 639 ha of buffer strips.

More than half (51.2%) of Silago’s total land area is classified as protected land. In retrospect, the Hinabian Watershed is found in the municipality. Silago also has the biggest percentage of timberland in the five pilot sites.

Development zones. In addition, 6,700 ha of land in Bontoc is identified as strategic agriculture and fishery development zone (SAFDZ) which are divided into strategic development zone for crop (6,652 ha) and strategic fishery development zone (48 ha). The area classified as non-SAFDZ are identified as remaining NPAAD (1,983 ha), watershed / forest development zone (832 ha) and built-up areas (695 ha) (Table 12). Maasin City has 7,527 ha SAFDZ with 7,146 ha strategic crop development zone and 111 ha strategic fishery development zone. It also has 2,318 ha remaining NPAAD, 7,926 ha watershed / forest development zone and 2,009 ha built-up areas. Silago has 3,700 ha SAFDZ divided into strategic development zone for crop (3,458 ha), livestock (200 ha) and fishery (42 ha). The non-SAFDZ is made up of 898 ha of remaining NPAAD, 14,707 ha of watershed / forest development zone and 275 ha of built-up areas. Sogod has 9,105 ha SAFDZ composed of strategic development zones for crop (9,069 ha) and livestock (36 ha). It also has 3,931 ha remaining NPAAD, 5,251 ha forest / watershed development zone and 983 ha built-up areas. The SAFDZ of Tomas Oppus is 3,070 ha which is solely devoted to strategic crop development. From the non-SAFDZ area, 2,140 ha is devoted to remaining NPAAD, 2,901 ha to watershed / forest development zone and 389 ha built-up areas.

18 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 10. Land suitability (hectares) in the pilot sites 3 MUNICIPALITIES Land Suitability Bontoc Maasin Silago Sogod Tomas Oppus SUITABLE LANDS Irrigated Rice Land 812.0 599.0 475.0 709.0 100.0 Rainfed Rice Land 52.0 417.0 5.0 10.0 85.0 Upland Rice Land 32.0 Cultivated Annual Crops 2,392.8 6,145.0 6,608.0 7,094.0 2,289.6 Perennial Tree and Vine Crops 2,881.0 7,835.0 7,663.0 6,853.0 2,536.8 Fishpond: Brackish 6.0 69.0 Freshwater 3.3 6.0 1.2 8.4 Forestry Plantation (Exotic) 785.0 250.0 256.0 Production Forest (Native) 511.0 556.0 896.0 874.0 CBFM 400.5 557.7 19.0 2,152.0 451.1 Pastures 15.0 Total Area Suitable for Land Use 7,073.0 17,002.0 17,767.0 17,693.0 5,727.0 Areas Not Suitable for Land Use 3,136.5 2,778.0 1,813.0 5,727.0 2,773.0

Table 11. Protected lands in the pilot sites MUNICIPALITIES Protected Lands Bontoc Maasin Silago Sogod Tomas Oppus Non-NIPAS: 3,198 3,682 9,123 15,447 1,294 Slope greater than 50% 1,580 1,815 6,165 13,629 653 Mangrove Forests 20 97 18 6 2 Buffer Strips 1,598 1,770 2,940 639 639 NPAAD Highly Restricted Agricultural Land 1,983 2,318 898 3,931 2,140 Total Protection Lands 5,181 6,000 10,021 19,378 3,434

Table 12. Area Distribution of Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone (SAFDZ) in the pilot sites SAFDZ AREAS (Ha.) NON-SAFDZ AREAS (Ha.) SUB- GRAND SUB-TOTAL Municipality TOTAL TOTAL (Ha.) 1 2 3 8 9 10 11 (Ha.) (Ha.) Bontoc 6,652 48 6,700 1,983 832 695 3,510 10,210 Maasin 7,416 111 7,527 2,318 7,926 2,009 12,253 19,780 Silago 3,458 200 42 3,700 898 14,707 275 15,880 19,580 Sogod 9,069 36 9,105 3,931 5,251 983 10,165 19,270 Tomas Oppus 3,070 3,070 2,140 2,901 389 5,430 8,500 1 Strategic Crop Dev’t. Zone 8 Remaining NPAAAD (Future expansion for SAFDZ) 2 Strategic Livestock Dev’t. Zone 9 Agro-Forestry Dev’t. Zone 3 Strategic Fishery Dev’t. Zone 10 Watershed / Forest Dev’t. Zone 11 Built-Up Areas Source: DA-BSWM

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 19 3 3.6 WATER, SANITATION, AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

The water system in the Province of Southern Leyte has three levels: Levels I, II and III. Level I include shallow wells, deep wells, dug wells, developed springs and rainwater collectors. Level II refers to the presence of a communal faucet system within 25-meter radius from the population. Water is distributed through a piped system provided with reservoirs supplied by adopted springs. Level III includes individual household connections. In developed areas like municipal centers and bigger barangays, most households may have Level III water system. Still, the Level I water system is reported to be the most common water system in the province.

Access to water in the pilot sites. Access to potable water is one of the basic requirements for a healthy population. Since better health is one of the foundations for the attainment of the full human potential, access to potable water has become one of the landmarks or indicators of community development. There are still a considerable percentage of households in the pilot sites that do not have access to potable water. For example, Bontoc has a total household number of 6,585. Although 5,683 of these households have access to potable water, there are still 902 households (13.7%) that do not have access to it (Table 13). All throughout the country, there is a high probability that those who have no access to potable water gather water for drinking and other household use from dug well, natural springs, rainwater which may be contaminated with bacteria and toxins harmful to health. More so, most of those who do not have access to potable water may also have limited access to health facilities and services, and no health insurance. Thus, they cannot always seek quality medical care whenever they contracted water- borne diseases. To make potable water available for all households is a challenge for LGUs.

Table 13. Households with access and without access to potable water in the pilot sites Households Percent of Percent of Households with Total without Households Households Municipality Access to Households Access to with Access to without Access Potable Water Potable Water Potable Water to Potable Water Bontoc 6,585 5,683 902 86.0 13.7 Maasin City 16,339 15,771 628 96.0 3.8 Silago 2,749 2,658 91 97.0 3.3 Sogod 8,328 6,536 1,792 78.0 21.5 Tomas Oppus 3,094 2,784 310 90.0 10.0

Sanitation and solid waste management. The Province of Southern Leyte is exerting measures to comply with Republic Act 9003 (Philippine Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000). However, the establishment of sanitary landfill is costly for LGUs to accomplish so that other means of safe waste disposal are resorted to. As reported by the Environmental Management Bureau in 2009, Southern Leyte, with 19 LGUs, has 12 open dumpsites, four controlled dumpsites and 16 junkshops where scrap metals and other recyclable materials are sold.

20 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Each of the five pilot sites maintains at least one solid waste facility. Bontoc, 3 Maasin, Sogod and Tomas Oppus have open dump sites. Silago has a sanitary land fill located near Tree Park in Silago (Table 14). In Bontoc, compost pit (68%) is reported to be the most common manner of garbage disposal followed by open dump site (32%). In Maasin, garbage is commonly disposed in the open dump site (65%) than in compost pits (35%). This pattern is also observed in Sogod where disposal in open dump site is 82% and 18% in compost pit (Table 15).

However, it must be noted that improper disposal of solid waste poses a threat to the environment and human health. Toxic wastes may find its way out of open dump sites through water ways and the air and thus pollute important water systems as well as induce certain types of diseases. In the last quarter of 2007 to 2008 alone, 490,000 kilograms of solid waste were generated throughout the province per day. Thus, the challenge for LGUs in the province is to allocate resources for the design and implementation of highly recommended solid waste disposal in complementation with an effective public education intervention.

Table 14. Solid waste facilities in the pilot sites (2010) Municipality Type of Facility Location Bontoc Open Dump Site Brgy. Guinsangaan Maasin Open Dump Site Brgy. Combado Silago Sanitary Land Fill Brgy. Poblacion (Near Tree Park) Sogod Open Dump Site Brgy. San Miguel Tomas Oppus Open Dump Site Brgy. Maanyag Source: Solid Waste Management Office, Provincial Capitol, Maasin City

Table 15. Manner of garbage disposal in the pilot sites Manner of Garbage Disposal (in Percent) Municipality Compost Pit Open Dump Site Bontoc 68 32 Maasin 35 65 Silago 85 15 Sogod 18 82 Tomas Oppus 60 40 Source: Solid Waste Management Office, Provincial Capitol, Maasin City

3.7 ELECTRICITY AND COMMUNICATIONS

Electric power supply is primarily not a problem in Eastern Visayas as it is the largest producer of geothermal energy in the country. The Tongonan Geothermal Production Field in Leyte generates a total capacity of 699.4 Megawatts (MW) capable of supplying electricity to the region and its neighboring provinces. Southern Leyte’s electric provider, SOLECO is one of the most efficient electric providers in the region. In 2009, Southern Leyte is one of the two provinces of Eastern Visayas which are able to achieve 100% electrification. This means that all the 19 LGUs and

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 21 3 their barangays are already energized. In the same year, 54% of the targeted number of household connections in Bontoc has actual electric connection, 96% in Maasin, 83% in Silago, 75% in Sogod and 69% in Tomas Oppus.

Communication facilities. Communication infrastructures are widely available in the pilot sites (Table 17). Four sites (Maasin, Bontoc, Sogod and Tomas Oppus) are connected through telephone lines provided by BAYANTEL and GLOBE. Silago, on the other hand, does not have access to telephone services. However, the expansion of wireless communications in the province made communication possible even in places which are impossible to reach by landline communication technologies due to location, cost and power limitations. Thus, the availability of wireless or mobile communications infrastructure in Silago and the other pilot sites even out people’s limited access to telephone especially through short message service (SMS) or texting. However, access to mobile communications technology may also prove to be limited in places which are difficult to reach by signal.

Table 16. Coverage and actual connections and members by municipality / sitio / purok (2009), Province of Southern Leyte Barangay Sitios / Puroks Connection Energized Energized Energized Municipality Member Coverage Actual Coverage Actual Unenergized Potential Actual % % % To Date To Date To Date Bontoc 40 39 98 147 128 87 19 6,500 3,523 54 3,415 Maasin 70 70 100 329 326 99 3 16,900 16,163 96 14,932 Silago 15 14 93 66 53 80 13 2,400 1,987 83 1,937 Sogod 45 40 89 181 163 90 18 8,800 6,566 75 5,620 Tomas Oppus 29 29 100 92 88 96 4 3,500 2,422 69 2,344 Source: SOLECO, Maasin City

Table 17. Inventory of cell sites, service provider and basic telephone service availability in the pilot sites No. of Service Provider Basic Telephone Municipality Cell sites SMART GLOBE SUN Service Availability Bontoc 2 1 1 BAYANTEL Maasin 7 2 3 2 BAYANTEL & GLOBE Silago 2 1 1 None Sogod 3 1 1 1 BAYANTEL & GLOBE Tomas Oppus 2 1 1 GLOBE-WLL Source: NTC, Maasin City

22 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4 Results and Discussion

This chapter discusses the major profile of the sample households between the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites. It likewise include credit and loan information, marketing of farm products, access to land and natural resources, farm characteristics and upland farming practices, income and expenditure, and environmental awareness and activities.

4.1 REDD+ AND NON-REDD+ SITES

A total of 92 barangays comprised the five REDD+ and Non-REDD+ study sites in Southern Leyte namely: Bontoc, Sogod, Tomas Oppus, Silago, and Maasin City of Southern Leyte. Of the total number of barangays, 71 barangays were selected by the REDD+ project management as the pilot sites. In turn, these were broken into 16 barangays in Sogod, 30 barangays in Bontoc, 14 barangays in Maasin City, 7 barangays in Tomas Oppus, and 4 barangays in Silago, Southern Leyte. In addition to the pilot barangays, for the purpose of this baseline study, 21 barangays not covered by the REDD+ pilot sites were designated as Non-REDD+ sites of which 5 barangays were included in Sogod, 5 barangays in Bontoc, 5 barangays in Maasin City, 4 barangays in Tomas Oppus, and 2 barangays in Silago, Southern Leyte (Fig. 5).

The REDD+ pilot barangays are the typical upland barangays in Southern Leyte where most of the household residents are basically dependent on upland farming among other sources of livelihood. To some extent, residents in some of these barangays have relatively closer access to available forest resources in the community. The Non-REDD+ sites, although generally similar in physical, environmental, socio-economic attributes compared with the REDD+ sites, are relatively farther away from the available forest resources.

4.2 DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLD RESPONDENTS

Distribution of household respondents. A total of 797 respondents were interviewed in the five REDD+ municipalities of Southern Leyte (Table 18). Of this number, 200 came from the Non-REDD+ communities and 597 were from the REDD+ communities. More than one-third of the total respondents (39.9%) were from the municipality of Bontoc because Figure 4. Distribution of respondents in project sites

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 23 4 among the five REDD+ municipalities, Bontoc had the highest number ofbarangays included as REDD+ sites. Maasin City comprised 25.1% of the total household respondents while the municipality of Sogod contributed 22.6% of the total household respondents. Only 9% and 3.4% of the total number of respondents came from the municipalities of Tomas Oppus and Silago, respectively (Fig. 4).

Figure 5. Map showing the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ barangays

Table 18. Distribution of respondents by municipality and by study sites Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Municipality Count % Count % Count % Bontoc 57 28.5 261 43.7 318 39.9 Sogod 38 19.0 142 23.8 180 22.6 Tomas Oppus 17 8.5 55 9.2 72 9.0 Maasin 79 39.5 121 20.3 200 25.1 Silago 9 4.5 18 3.0 27 3.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

24 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4.3 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

This section discusses briefly the socio-demographic characteristics of household respondents and compares or contrasts some similarities and / or differences between the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ sites.

Gender, civil status and religion. In the Philippines, households are usually headed by the father who is normally the bread winner of the family. As expected the household heads in majority of the households surveyed were predominantly males (Table 19). Of the 797 respondents, more than 90% of the household heads in both study sites were males and a greater majority of them were married. Only very few households were headed by females; the rest were headed by either single mothers or fathers. Also, most of the household heads belong to the Roman Catholic Church.

Table 19. Socio-demographic characteristics of household heads Socio-Demographic Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Characteristics Count % Count % Count % Gender Male 185 92.5 564 94.5 749 94.0 Female 15 7.5 33 5.5 48 6.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Civil Status Single 9 4.5 13 2.2 22 2.8 Married 165 82.5 512 85.8 677 84.9 Widowed 20 10.0 49 8.2 69 8.7 Divorced / Separated 3 1.5 7 1.2 10 1.3 Others 3 1.5 16 2.7 19 2.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Religion Roman Catholic 193 96.5 523 87.6 716 89.8 Other religions 7 3.5 74 12.5 81 10.2

Household structure and household size. There are two types of families in the Philippines, nuclear and extended families. A nuclear family is composed of parents and children. Extended family is made up of a nuclear family and other members who are staying with the family. As such, family members including parents, children, even newly married ones, grandparents and other relatives who live with the family were counted as family members. However, those who left for employment within the Philippines or abroad were no longer considered in computing the household size.

Nuclear families made up 60% of the households in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites. Extended families made up more than one third of the household respondents (38% for Non-REDD+ and 35.7% for REDD+) (Table 20). In some cases, a son or daughter who is married may opt to stay with the parents

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 25 especially when they are just starting a family or while they are still constructing their own house. A relative may also opt to stay with the family because of old age and thus need company to take care of them. A relative from other parts of Leyte may have also migrated to the area for work or because of the availability of land to till. Only very few of the households had only one member (1.5% for the Non- REDD+ and 4.4% for the REDD+).

Table 20. Household structure / type of family Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Household Structure Count % Count % Count % Single 3 1.5 26 4.4 29 3.6 Nuclear 121 60.5 358 60.0 479 60.1 Extended 76 38.0 213 35.7 289 36.3 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Fifty-two point five percent of the Non-REDD+ and 47.6% of the REDD+ respondents had a household size of four to six. A little over 30% of respondents in both sites had a household size of one to three (Table 21). Likewise, majority of both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households had one to three children while 19.8% had children ranging from four to six. Only very few of the households had seven to nine children and more than a fifth of the households had no children. Bigger households included members like relatives and household helpers who lived with the family in addition to the children.

On the average, both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households were composed of five members. This finding is higher than the average household size of the country which is 4.8 as of 2007 (NSO, 2010) and relatively higher compared to the average household size of Southern Leyte (4.7) and the whole Eastern Visayas (4.85). This is an important implication for REDD+ since the demand for food increases with household size. A rise in average household size may therefore spur the necessity to produce more food to meet the food needs of the family. Consequently, given the limited farm land, farm area may expand to the forests or shifting cultivation may be resorted to.

Table 21. Household size, number of children, and other household members Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Item Count % Count % Count % Household Size 1 - 3 61 30.5 188 31.5 249 31.2 4 - 6 105 52.5 284 47.6 389 48.8 7 - 9 31 15.5 105 17.6 136 17.1 10-13 3 1.5 20 3.4 23 2.9 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

26 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Item Count % Count % Count % Number of Children 1 – 3 112 56.0 330 55.3 442 55.5 4 – 6 40 20.0 118 19.8 158 19.8 7 – 9 4 2.0 24 4.0 28 3.5 None 44 22.0 125 20.9 169 21.2 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Educational attainment of household heads. Previous studies covering part of the pilot sites (Armenia et. al, 1990; Armenia, 1997) showed that upland farmers have lower educational attainment since a greater majority of them only completed either primary or elementary education. The results in the current study corroborated with the previous finding since a higher proportion in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites reported that they finished elementary. Among the Non- REDD+ respondents, only 28.5% attained secondary level while for the REDD+ respondents, 21.8% reached high school (Table 22). Among household heads in the Non-REDD+ communities, 42.5% reached the elementary level while only 38.9% finished elementary in the REDD+ communities. Relatively, more household heads in the REDD+ communities completed the primary level constituting 29.3% as compared to that of the Non-REDD+ communities which is only 17%.

Table 22. Educational attainment of household heads Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Educational Attainment Count % Count % Count % No Grade Completed 2 1.0 10 1.7 12 1.5 Primary Grade 34 17.0 175 29.3 209 26.2 Elementary Grade 85 42.5 232 38.9 317 39.8 Secondary Grade 57 28.5 130 21.8 187 23.5 Vocational 9 4.5 7 1.2 16 2.0 College Level 12 6.0 32 5.4 44 5.5 Graduated or earned a degree 1 0.5 11 1.8 12 1.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

When asked whether educational facilities existed in their communities, almost all reported that elementary schools are available in their barangays (Table 23). Unlike the elementary schools, however, majority of both sites reported of having no secondary schools in their villages. Only 27.5% of the Non-REDD+ households said they have secondary schools, while only 17.8% of the REDD+ households said a secondary school is available. It shall be noted however that not all villages have public secondary high schools all throughout the country since the establishment of secondary educational institutions are dependent on funding, area and population of the village, and the potential number of enrollees. Only two Non-REDD+ households said vocational high schools exist in their locality. Nevertheless, most barangays have day care centers.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 27 As primary or elementary educational facilities are the only ones available in the study sites, there seemed to be a correlation between access to educational facilities and the level of education of upland farmers and members of their family. Since farming households can barely afford to send their children to the existing educational institutions in their villages, as a consequence, their children who would be future upland farmers themselves will probably have low educational level.

Table 23. Educational facilities present in the barangay Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Elementary Yes 189 94.5 532 89.1 721 90.5 No 11 5.5 65 10.9 76 9.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Secondary Yes 55 27.5 106 17.8 161 20.2 No 145 72.5 491 82.2 636 79.8 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Vocational Yes 2 1.0 2 0.3 No 198 99.0 597 100.0 795 99.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Day Care Center Yes 198 99.0 540 90.5 738 92.6 No 2 1.0 57 9.5 59 7.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Type of schools attended. The choice of which school to enroll is usually influenced by financial resources and proximity of the school to one’s place of residence. In the Philippines, public elementary and secondary education has been implemented by law as free and open to all children. However, those who can afford and are residents near the town or city proper may prefer to enroll their children in quality private schools.

For both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites, almost all of the household members who were studying during the survey were enrolled in public schools, most especially for their primary, elementary and secondary education. Of the total household members in the Non-REDD+ communities who attended school, 93.8% were in public schools while 6.2% were in private schools. In the REDD+ communities 94.8% of those household members in school were enrolled in public schools while 5.2% were in private schools (Table 24).

28 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 24. Type of school attended by members of households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of School Attended Cases % Cases % Cases % Public 287 93.8 886 94.8 1173 94.5 Private 19 6.2 49 5.2 68 5.5 Total 306 100.0 935 100.0 1241 100.0

Reasons for not attending or attending schools. Scarce financial resources were pointed out as a primary factor behind the low educational level of respondents in both sites (52.7%). This was specifically expressed by 54.9% and 44.5% from the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites, respectively (Table 25). In addition to scarcity of financial resources, lack of interest to attend school was also cited. It would be worth mentioning that during the survey some household members were married at an early age and some opted to work to help the family instead of staying in school.

Table 25. Household members’ reasons for not attending school Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reason Not Attending School* Cases % Cases % Cases % Financial problem 24 44.5 117 54.9 141 52.7 Not interested 21 38.9 71 32.3 92 34.5 Got married at an early age 3 5.6 3 1.4 6 2.2 Got pregnant 1 1.9 1 0.5 2 0.7 Disabled 1 0.5 1 0.4 Other reasons 9 14.9 16 11.9 36 12.7 *multiple response

Ethnic backgrounds of household heads. In the Philippines, ethnicity is determined by a person’s place of birth or dialect spoken. For example, if one’s place of birth is , then s / he is called a Cebuano or “bisaya”; a person born in Davao is called a Davaoeño; if one is born in Leyte, a person would be a Leyteño or “bisaya” if s / he is Visayan or Cebuano speaking. Results of the survey indicate that almost all of the household heads and their spouses in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites were “Bisaya” or “Cebuanos”. A few were Boholanos, Surigaonons, Leyteños, Waray, Ilocanos, and others. The rest were Southern Leyteños, Boholanos, Waray, Bikolanos, and others. It must be noted, however, that since most of the people in Mindanao and the Visayas are Cebuano speaking, ethnicity cannot be solely determined by the dialect spoken. Case in point, Boholanos and Southern Leyteños speak the same dialect.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 29 Table 26. Ethnic background of head of households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Ethnic Background Count % Count % Count % Leyteño / Bisaya / Cebuano 190 95.5 539 90.8 729 91.9 Boholano 3 1.5 28 4.7 31 3.9 Waray-Waray 4 2.0 17 2.9 21 2.7 Surigaonon 4 0.7 4 0.5 Ilocano 3 0.5 3 0.4 Other ethnic backgrounds** 2 1.0 3 0.6 5 0.6 Total 199 100.0 594 100.0 793 100.0 **Davaoeño, Tagalog, Chavacano, Ilonggo

Place of origin of household head and spouse. Of all the provinces in Region 8, the average net migration in Southern Leyte is the lowest at 1.513 persons per year (DA-RFU8, 2004). Hence, majority of the household head respondents (68.1%) and their spouses (62.2%) surveyed were non- migrants or natives in their locality (Fig. 6). On the other hand, among the household heads classified as migrants, majority came from other towns or adjacent places in Southern Leyte, (61.4%) of which 56.4% were from the Non-REDD+ sites and 62.8% from the REDD+ sites (Table 27). The findings basically imply that most of the household heads and their spouses in both survey sites originated from within the Province of Southern Leyte.

Reasons for moving. Marriage was cited as the primary reason for moving from their place of origin among the households that transferred to reside in REDD+ or Non-REDD+ sites (63.4% in Non-REDD+ sites; 48.9% in REDD+ sites) (Table 28). Another pull factor for their current place of residence is the availability of land as mentioned by 23.1% and 33.5% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households, respectively. Land scarcity in their previous place of origin prompted them to migrate because they were either landless or did not have security of tenure. In a number of cases involving some REDD+ areas, logging activities used to be widespread. When logging was stopped, pieces of lands were left idle and available for cultivation and attracted several migrants into the area. Others in the Non- REDD+ areas (9.6%) said they moved to the current place because of their work and 11.9% of the household heads in the REDD+ sites cited other reasons for moving to their current area of residence. For instance, unstable peace and order situation in their former places of residence was mentioned by 1.9% of the Non- REDD+ households and 2% of the REDD+ households.

30 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 27. Places of origin of head of households and spouse Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Places of Origin Count % Count % Count % Head of Household Non-Migrant 145 72.5 398 66.7 543 68.1 Migrant: 55 27.5 199 33.3 254 31.9 Other Place in Southern Leyte 31 56.4 125 62.8 156 61.4 Leyte 15 27.3 40 20.1 55 21.7 Mindanao 5 9.1 17 8.5 22 8.7 Other Areas in Visayas 1 1.8 15 7.5 16 6.3 2 3.6 2 1.0 4 1.6 Others 1 1.8 1 0.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Spouse Non-Migrant 130 65.0 366 61.3 496 62.2 Migrant: 70 35.0 231 38.7 301 37.8 Other Place in Southern Leyte 43 61.4 136 58.9 179 59.5 Leyte 14 20.0 43 18.6 57 18.9 Mindanao 9 12.9 24 10.4 33 11.0 Other Areas in Visayas 3 4.3 22 9.5 25 8.3 Luzon 1 1.4 5 2.2 6 2.0 Others 1 0.4 1 0.3 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 28. Reasons of household heads for moving into the present residence Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons for Moving Count % Count % Count % Marriage 33 63.4 99 48.9 132 51.9 Availability of land 12 23.1 68 33.5 80 31.5 Work-related 5 9.6 24 11.9 29 11.4 Peace and order 1 1.9 4 2.0 5 2.0 Other reasons 1 1.9 1 0.4 Total 52 100.0 203 100.0 255 100.0

Spouses also transferred to the place where they are currently staying because of marriage. Usually, female spouses were the ones who followed their husbands to their places of residence. This was pointed out by 80.9% of the Non-REDD+ and 73.8% of the REDD+ respondents. Other reasons cited were availability of land, work and the deteriorating peace and order situation.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 31 Table 29. Reason of spouses for moving into the present residence Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons for Transferring Count % Count % Count % Marriage 59 80.9 171 73.8 230 75.4 Availability of land 10 13.7 14.2 14.2 43 14.1 Work-related 2 2.8 17 7.3 19 6.3 Peace and order 2 2.7 4 1.7 6 2.0 Siblings / Family 6 2.6 6 1.9 Other reasons 1 0.4 1 0.3 Total 73 100.0 232 100.0 305 100.0

Household decision-making. Filipino households adopt flexible arrangements on matters related to household decision making. Decisions are made by either the husband or wife, or both the husband and wife, or the whole family. Among the respondent-households, majority of the Non-REDD+ (51%) and more than forty percent (44.2%) of the REDD+ households argued that household decisions are both decided by husbands and wives. Yet, when deciding on matters affecting the family, the wives often had the hand (21% Non-REDD+; 29.5% REDD+) over their husbands (18% Non-REDD+; 22.1% REDD+) (Table 30). In some households, decision-making tended to be participatory and is shared by the whole family (6.5% Non-REDD+; 2.8% REDD+). A few other households let their children do the decision making as cited by 3% and 1.3% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ household respondents. It is worth noting that in more than half of the households, decisions are jointly made by both the husband and wife. This implies that there is discussion and consultation between the husband and wife before decisions are made. This finding has implications in the adoption or participation of the household in REDD+ related activities.

Table 30. Decision-making among households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Who Makes Decision Count % Count % Count % Both Husband & Wife 102 51.0 264 44.2 366 45.9 Wife 42 21.0 176 29.5 218 27.4 Husband 36 18.0 132 22.1 168 21.1 Whole family 13 6.5 17 2.8 30 3.8 Children 6 3.0 8 1.3 14 1.8 Sister 1 0.5 1 0.1 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.3.1 HOUSEHOLD ASSETS / POSSESSIONS

Typical Filipino households in the upland areas normally own a variety of household assets. From the results of the survey, both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents owned several household appliances such as dining sets, TV sets, sala sets, telephones and or mobile phones, VHS / CD players, cabinets and electric

32 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte fans. They also owned other appliances such as washing machines, refrigerators, motorcycles, radio and many others.

Household assets. As gleaned from Table 31, a higher proportion of Non- REDD+ households owned valued assets such as TV set, VHS / DVD / VCD set, electric fan, refrigerator, motorcycle which is used for family transportation needs or as “habal-habal” for hire, vehicle such as truck, car, or jeep, and telephone / mobile phone. Although a difference in ownership of valued assets was noticeable between the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites, the proportional differences was not that high. For instance, single motorcycles were owned by 34.7% of the households in the Non-REDD+ sites and 29.1% of the households in the REDD+ sites; TV sets were owned by 73.1% of the Non-REDD+ and 63.5% from the REDD+ household respondents; refrigerators were owned by 34.2% of the Non-REDD+ households and 20.5% of the REDD+ households.

Mode of acquisition of household assets. More than 60% for each group of households (65.8% Non-REDD+ and 63.8% REDD+) purchased their household assets themselves. More than 23% inherited them from their parents and some built by themselves those that can be constructed (Table 32).

House ownership. Almost all of the households interviewed owned the houses they currently occupy (92.5% for the Non-REDD+ and 86.6% for the REDD+ households). Only 6.5% of the Non-REDD+ households and 10.8% of the REDD+ household respondents said they do not own the house where they stayed. Instead, they occupied it for free. There were very few who just rented their house. This was especially true in the REDD+ study sites. A few (0.6%) acquired their house through inheritance and one household stayed in a house built by the Gawad Kalinga (GK) (Table 33).

Type of roofing material. In the past, houses with galvanized iron or GI sheets roofing were commonly used by households that are comparably wealthier. At that time, GI sheets are relatively expensive than nipa shingles and the latter’s main material, nipa palms, were still abundant and cheaper. Presently, however, nipa shingles are more expensive and most households would rather use GI sheets which is durable, readily available and cheaper in the long run. As shown in Table 34, almost all of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents used (GI sheets) as roofing materials for their houses.

Table 31. Distribution of respondents according to their household possessions Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Household Assets Cases % Cases % Cases % Communication Telephone / Mobile Phone 129 66.8 265 47.2 394 52.3 Entertainment TV set 141 73.1 356 63.5 497 65.9 VHS / VCD / DVD player 108 56.0 278 49.6 386 51.2 Cassette 46 23.8 128 22.8 174 23.1

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 33 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Household Assets Cases % Cases % Cases % Karaoke 42 21.8 126 22.5 168 22.3 Dream / Cignal satellite dish 1 0.2 1 0.1 Musical instruments 1 0.5 1 0.1 Furniture Dining set 139 72 400 71.3 539 71.5 Sala set 126 65.3 310 55.3 436 57.8 Cabinet 87 45.1 227 40.5 314 41.6 Appliances Electric fan 88 45.6 195 34.8 283 37.5 Refrigerator 66 34.2 115 20.5 181 24.0 Gas stove (LPG) 39 20.2 81 14.4 120 15.9 Washing Machine 31 16.1 47 8.4 78 10.3 Rice cooker 9 4.7 34 6.1 43 5.7 Sewing machine 17 8.8 24 4.3 41 5.4 Flat iron 10 5.2 28 5.0 38 5.0 Personal computer 6 3.1 13 2.3 19 2.5 Micro-wave / Electric stove 3 1.6 14 2.5 17 2.3 / Gas range Kerosene stove 3 1.6 1 0.2 4 0.5 Oven toaster 2 1.0 2 0.3 Air-conditioner 1 0.5 1 0.2 2 0.3 Water dispenser 1 0.5 1 0.2 2 0.3 Blender 1 0.5 1 0.1 Transportation Motorcycle / ”Habal-habal” 67 34.7 163 29.1 230 30.5 Bicycle 17 8.8 38 6.8 55 7.3 Truck / car / jeepney 6 3.1 9 1.6 15 2.0 Tricycle 3 1.6 11 2.0 14 1.9 Boat / Banca 9 1.6 9 1.2 Machinery Abaca machine 1 0.5 1 0.2 2 0.3 Chainsaw 1 0.5 1 0.1 Vulcanizing equipment 1 0.2 1 0.1 Generator 1 0.2 1 0.1 Jewelry 21 10.9 51 9.1 72 9.5 Accessories Battery radio 39 20.2 136 24.2 175 23.2 Other accessories 7 1.2 7 0.9 *acquired in exchange of other items / assets in possession

34 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 32. Mode of acquisition of household assets Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Mode of Acquisition Cases % Cases % Cases % Bought 824 65.8 1969 63.8 2793 64.3 Inherited 290 23.1 733 23.8 1023 23.6 Made / Built 134 10.7 372 12.1 506 11.7 Borrowed 4 0.3 5 0.2 9 0.2 Pawned 6 0.2 6 0.1 Bartered* 1 0.1 1 0.0 2 0.0

Table 33. Status of ownership of the house Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total House Ownership Count % Count % Count % Owned 185 92.5 517 86.6 702 88.1 Occupied for fee 13 6.5 64 10.8 77 9.6 Rented 1 0.5 9 1.5 10 1.3 Inherited 1 0.5 4 0.7 5 0.6 GK Village 1 0.2 1 0.1 Occupied (without consent of owner) 1 0.2 1 0.1 Owner of the house but not the lot 1 0.2 1 0.1 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 34. Types of roofing materials used for the house Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of Roofing Materials Count % Count % Count % Gl sheet 193 96.5 571 95.6 764 95.9 Nipa 6 3.0 8 1.3 14 1.8 Cogon 12 2.0 12 1.5 Trapal 2 0.3 2 0.3 Others* 1 0.5 4 0.7 5 0.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 *combinations of: GI sheet and bamboo, GI sheet and cogon, GI sheet and nipa

Flooring material of the house. The type of flooring materials used reflects the economic status of the households. For example, those who can afford will use cement or hard wood as flooring materials. Although there were also households who would rather use cement because it is readily available and are more durable. The households covered by the study used a variety of materials for flooring (Table 35). In the Non-REDD+ sites, 61% had cemented floors, while in the REDD+ sites, only 54.8% used cement as flooring materials. Some (16.5% for the Non-REDD+ and 20.1% for the REDD+) used bamboo for flooring. Other flooring materials used by households included earthen sands (11% of the Non-REDD+ and 10.2% of the REDD+ respondents); wood (5.5% and 9.9% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households); and tile floors. There were also respondents who employed a combination of either bamboo and cement, wood and cement, or earthen sand and bamboo as flooring.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 35 Table 35. Types of flooring materials used by the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of Flooring Materials Count % Count % Count % Cement 122 61.0 327 54.8 449 56.3 Bamboo 33 16.5 120 20.1 153 19.2 Earthen sand 22 11.0 61 10.2 83 10.4 Wood 11 5.5 59 9.9 70 8.8 Other flooring materials* 12 6.0 30 5.0 42 5.3 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 * (flooring materials: tiles, bamboo & half cement, cement & wood, bamboo & earthen sand, earthen sand and wood)

Walling materials. In the past, when wood were highly available and affordable most households preferred to use wood as walling material for their houses. Those that used cement walls were comparatively better off since the material was costly. Hence, existing houses with wooden walls were usually built in the era of cheaper lumber. However, these days, the use of wood as walls is already considered expensive due to limited supply and the high price of wood products. Consequently, most houses nowadays have cemented or concrete walls because of their availability and durability. It can be posited that affordability of the material is one factor that influenced the choice of walling material.

As gleaned from Table 36, 50% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 47.2% of the REDD+ respondents used cement as walls in their houses while almost 20% of the Non-REDD+ households and 24.1% of the REDD+ respondents used bamboo as walling material. Wood was also used by more than 15% of both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents. Some households used walling material that is a combination of cement and wood (semi-concrete) as revealed by 8% and 5.4% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents, respectively.

Table 36. Materials used as walls for the house Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of House Walls Count % Count % Count % Cement 100 50.0 282 47.2 382 47.9 Bamboo 39 19.5 144 24.1 183 22.9 Wood 37 18.5 119 19.9 156 19.6 Half cement and half wood 16 8.0 32 5.4 48 6.0 Other wall materials 8 4.0 20 3.3 28 3.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Source of drinking water. Drinking water in both study sites was highly available for the majority of households. The survey indicates that communal faucet constructed by the barangay is the most common source of drinking water as mentioned by 54% and 64.7% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents, respectively (Table 37). There were also households that have water connections at home and got water from their private faucets as cited by 40.5% of the Non-REDD+ households and

36 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 29.8% of the REDD+ households. Others have private wells and pumps in their homes while about 2% of the respondents drink purified water. One respondent claimed he drinks rainwater. This finding is important considering that forests are sources of water. In addition to global warming, forest loss would also mean loss of water supply to the communities. Forest preservation is associated with sustainable water supply and this is a push factor to motivate the people in the area to participate in any intervention to preserve the forest.

Table 37. Source of drinking water for the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Water Count % Count % Count % Community faucet 108 54.0 386 64.7 494 62.0 Private faucet 81 40.5 178 29.8 259 32.5 Private pump 4 2.0 15 2.5 19 2.4 Purified water 6 3.0 9 1.5 15 1.9 Private well 1 0.5 8 1.3 9 1.1 Water from the rain 1 0.2 1 0.1 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Type of toilet. The kind of toilet used by households could be used as an indicator of poverty. Flush tank type is relatively expensive compared with other types of toilet that are affordable and cheap, hence only few of the households had this kind of toilet. The “” type is the traditional type of toilet in the rural areas and is the least costly. Basically, this type of toilet is an outhouse that does not use much water and the waste goes directly to the pit.

With the availability of water in the study sites, majority of the respondents had water sealed toilets in their homes. Only a few households had a flush tank type of toilet and about 0.9% had the antipolo type of toilet (Table 38). About 4.6% of the households, however, did not have toilets. Presumably, these households used communal toilets provided by their community or may have simply used vacant spaces within their surroundings in lieu of toilets.

Lighting source of households. In almost all the barangays in the study sites, electrical power is available. Yet, few villages are not yet energized because these villages are located in very remote areas and electricity installation is a not viable option for electric providers.

Results of the survey indicate that a greater majority (89%) of Non-REDD+ households and 84% of REDD+ households have electrical connections at home for their lighting needs (Table 39). Only a few households used kerosene especially in very remote places where there are no electrical connections. Some use a combination of electricity and kerosene. One respondent depended on a battery powered source of light and coconut oil. This respondent is probably located far from the source of electricity. The use of solar energy as a power source in the area is not yet popular.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 37 Table 38. Type of toilet used by the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of Toilet Count % Count % Count % Water sealed 186 94.9 541 92.5 727 93.1 Flush tank 3 1.5 8 1.4 11 1.4 Antipolo type 2 1.0 5 0.9 7 0.9 None 5 2.6 31 5.3 36 4.6 Total 196 100.0 585 100.0 781 100.0

Table 39. Source of lights used by the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Lights Count % Count % Count % Electric 178 89.0 501 84.0 679 85.1 Kerosene 17 8.5 80 13.4 97 12.2 Electric and kerosene 5 2.5 15 2.5 20 2.5 Battery / dry cell 1 0.2 1 0.1 Kerosene, coconut oil and 1 0.2 1 0.1 battery / dry cell Total 200 100.0 598 100.0 798 100.0

Fuel used for cooking. Farm-household respondents used alternative sources of fuel for cooking. In Leyte and Southern Leyte Provinces, piles of fuel woods are usually displayed for sale on the road side and the amount of which could be indicative of the extent and volume of fuel wood gathering in the area. In the study sites, the volume of fuel wood on-display to potential buyers is relatively very small as compared to other areas in Leyte. However, the use of fuel wood for home cooking is still dominant in both study sites since almost all (93.5%) of Non- REDD+ households and 94% of REDD+ households relied heavily on wood as fuel for cooking. Palm fronds, coco or wood charcoal, LPG, and kerosene were also used for cooking.

Since coconut constitutes the biggest proportion of the crops grown in the study sites, coconut palm fronds abound in the area were used for cooking by more than 20% of the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites. The use of palm fronds is environment friendly because it minimizes the cutting of trees as firewood. However, it is still alarming to know that fuel wood is widely used by households for their household cooking needs. Perhaps the availability of sources for fuel wood in the study sites and the continuous increases in the price of LPG contributed to the high use of fuel wood among households in the study area.

38 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 40. Fuel used for cooking by the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Fuel type* Cases % Cases % Cases % Fuel wood 187 93.5 561 94.0 748 93.9 Coconut palm fronds 50 25.0 139 23.3 189 23.7 Coco / wood charcoal 15 7.5 56 9.4 71 8.9 LPG 18 9.0 39 6.5 57 7.2 Coco husks and shells 3 1.5 17 2.8 20 2.5 Other types of fuel** 2 0.4 2 0.2 None 1 0.2 1 0.1 *multiple response **sawdust, kerosene

Source of fuel wood used for cooking. When asked on sources of fuel wood, approximately one-third of the respondents in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites claimed they gathered them from nearby forests (Table 41). Close to one-fourth of the respondents got fuel wood from their own backyards and a third of them claimed that they gather fuel wood from their own farms. A few purchased fuel wood from the sari-sari store. Fuel wood gathering is another activity to be looked into because this may lead to cutting of more trees.

Source of charcoal for cooking. Charcoal users said they produced their own charcoal in their farms or just in the backyard while others bought it from the sari- sari store or in the town market (Table 42). Almost one half of those who reported using charcoal for cooking produced it in their farms.

Source of coco fronds for cooking. Coco fronds are mostly gathered by the households from their farms as revealed by 56.8% of Non-REDD+ respondents and 41.9% of REDD+ respondents (Table 43). They also gathered coco fronds from their own backyards according to 29.5% of Non-REDD+ households and 39.7% of REDD+ households. Some said they gathered them from the nearby forest.

Table 41. Source of fuel wood used for cooking Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Fuel Count % Count % Count % Nearby forest 60 32.1 222 39.7 282 37.8 Backyard 48 25.7 179 32.0 227 30.4 Farm 59 31.6 142 25.4 201 26.9 Sari-sari store 12 6.4 10 1.8 22 2.9 Backyard and nearby forest 5 2.7 5 0.9 10 1.3 Town market 2 1.1 1 0.2 3 0.4 Nearby forest and sari-sari store 1 0.5 1 0.1 Total 187 100.0 559 100.0 746 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 39 Table 42. Source of charcoal used for cooking Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Charcoal Count % Count % Count % Farm 8 47.1 26 44.8 34 45.3 Backyard 2 11.8 24 41.4 26 34.7 Sari-sari store 5 29.4 7 12.1 12 16.0 Town market 2 11.8 1 1.7 3 4.0 Total 17 100.0 58 100.0 75 100.0

Table 43. Source of coco fronds used for cooking Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Coco Fronds Count % Count % Count % Farm 25 56.8 57 41.9 82 45.6 Backyard 13 29.5 54 39.7 67 37.2 Nearby forest 6 13.6 25 18.4 31 17.2 Total 44 100.0 136 100.0 180 100.0

4.3.2 INFORMATION SOURCES

The household respondents have varied sources of information (Table 44). Information may be classified as national or local news and current affairs, weather and environment related information, price, and other economic information. Of all the available information sources, TV was the widely used information source by both the greater majority of the Non-REDD+ (85.9%) respondents and the REDD+ respondents (82.8%). TV was cited as a popular source of information because almost all households have TV sets which usually served their recreation needs. Watching TV shows is a popular past time among households during early evening until primetime. The next widely used medium is the radio from which 32.3% of the Non-REDD+ households and more than 40% of the REDD+ households derived information. Radio was also popular especially in households that do not have electricity since it is entertaining, affordable and portable. It should be noted that listening to radio is a popular past time among farmers who even carry their radio sets to the farms. Friends and relatives were also considered important sources of information as revealed by 24.7% of the Non-REDD+ and 29.4% REDD+ respondents. The use of cell phones as information is also getting popular now that cell sites are spread throughout the region. Three and eight respondents from Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households mentioned the use of mobile phones to get information. Understandably, newspaper was not a common source of information because Southern Leyte is far from the urban centers where newspapers are widely circulated.

Importance of TV set as information source. Almost all (93%) of the Non- REDD+ households considered their TV sets as very important information source and the same thought was shared by 88.6% of the REDD+ respondents. The remaining households (7.1% of the Non-REDD+ and 11% of the REDD+ respondents) did not consider TV as important source of information (Table 45).

40 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Importance of radio as information source. Close to one-half (48.4%) of the Non-REDD+ respondents rated radio as a very important source of information while the majority (56.3%) from the REDD+ sites considered radio to be very important. Fifty percent of the Non-REDD+ respondents did not consider radio as an important source of information. The same assessment was echoed by 42.1% of the REDD+ households (Table 46).

Importance of friends and relatives as information source. Only 32.7% of the Non-REDD+ respondents considered friends and relatives as very important sources of information (Table 47). Among the REDD+ households, 35.1% considered their friends and relatives as very important sources of information. The remaining respondents considered the contrary. Nineteen (38.8%) of the Non- REDD+ respondents considered their friends and relatives not important sources of information. Likewise, 43.1% of the REDD+ households did not consider friends and relatives as very important information sources.

Table 44. Sources of information of the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Information* Cases % Cases % Cases % TV 170 85.9 490 82.8 660 83.5 Radio 64 32.3 240 40.5 304 38.5 Friends / Relatives 49 24.7 174 29.4 223 28.2 Gov’t. Personnel / Technician 4 2.0 22 3.7 26 3.3 Newspaper 3 1.5 8 1.4 11 1.4 Mobile / Landline Phone 3 1.5 8 1.4 11 1.4 *multiple response

Table 45. Importance of television as source of information of the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Rank Count % Count % Count % Very important 158 93.0 434 88.6 592 89.7 Less important 12 7.1 54 11.0 66 10.0 Important 2 0.4 2 0.3 Total 170 100.0 490 100.0 660 100.0

Table 46. Importance of radio as source of information Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Rank Count % Count % Count % Very important 31 48.4 135 56.3 166 54.6 Less important 32 50.0 101 42.1 133 43.8 Important 1 1.6 2 0.8 3 1.0 Not so important 2 0.8 2 0.7 Total 64 100.0 240 100.0 304 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 41 Table 47. Importance of friends / relative as source of information Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Rank Count % Count % Count % Very important 16 32.7 61 35.1 77 34.5 Less important 19 38.8 75 43.1 94 42.2 Important 13 26.5 35 20.1 48 21.5 Not so important 1 2.0 2 1.1 3 1.3 Not important at all 1 0.6 1 0.4 Total 49 100.0 174 100.0 223 100.0

Mobile phone access. Mobile phone as means of access to communication is not widely available in most of the barangays especially the REDD+ barangays (Table 48). For instance, many of the remote mountainous barangays in Maasin City, Bontoc, Sogod, Tomas Oppus, and Silago have no access to communication through mobile phones in spite of the availability of the system in the municipality since these areas are hard to reach by wireless signal. This lack of access to mobile phone communication facilities among upland farming households in many of the upland barangays vis-à-vis the high economic benefit it can generate such as reduced transportation costs and access to updated market information, seemed to be given less priority by local government units (LGUs) and the local officials. For instance, each barangay could have put up a low cost communal mobile phone access system to facilitate and enhance the flow of information if only the needed infrastructure was available.

Table 48. Access to mobile phone communication services Access to Mobile Phone Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Services Count % Count % Count % Yes 2 1.0 2 0.3 4 0.5 No 198 99.0 595 99.7 793 99.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Access to information on rainfall prediction, market prices and policy changes. A greater proportion of household respondents reported regular access to information regarding rainfall prediction. A greater majority of households in both the Non-REDD+ (83%) and REDD+ sites (82.4%) claimed that they have regular information access to rainfall prediction from weather forecasts which they got from either the news on TV or radio. The rest of the households said they have no regular access to information sources. When asked if they have access to market price information, 85.5% of the REDD+ respondents answered yes. More than 80% of the REDD+ respondents reported having regular access to market price information for their farm produce and for the basic commodities they are buying. Less than 20% (14.5% Non-REDD+ and 19.1% REDD+) said they have no access to market price information. Information on policy changes are relatively harder to access than market price or rainfall pattern because these are not extensively publicized but surprisingly, more than three-fourths (76.5%) of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 72.9% of the REDD+ respondents said they have

42 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte access to information on policy changes. Almost 25% of the respondents claimed they have no access to policy changes information (Table 49).

Table 49. Regular access to rainfall, market prices, and policy changes Regular Access on Specific Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Information Count % Count % Count % Rainfall Prediction Yes 166 83.0 492 82.4 658 82.6 No 34 17.0 105 17.6 139 17.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Market Price Yes 171 85.5 483 80.9 654 82.1 No 29 14.5 114 19.1 143 17.9 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Policy Changes Yes 153 76.5 435 72.9 588 73.8 No 47 23.5 162 27.1 209 26.2 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.3.3 COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS

Membership and type of organization. Majority from both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sample households were members of village-level organizations (Table 50). Those who are members, 30.5% of the Non-REDD+ and 21.6% of REDD+ respondents belong to civic groups. Civic group is a type of organization that aims to help and provide services to people in a community for free such as senior citizen and death aid groups. Membership in religious organization was also popular among household respondents (21.5% Non-REDD+ and 21.1% REDD+). Furthermore, 7.2% of the total respondents were members of livelihood or farmer organizations. Organizations of this type provide members with free farming materials and equipment, even seed and fertilizer subsidies. Some of the respondents were also identified with political or government organizations, environment-related organizations, cooperatives, irrigation, loan and water associations (Table 51).

Table 50. Membership of any organizations Member of any Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total organization Count % Count % Count % Yes 102 51.0 307 51.4 409 51.3 No 98 49.0 290 48.6 388 48.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 43 Table 51. Type of organizations Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of Organization* Cases % Cases % Cases % Civic 61 30.5 129 21.6 190 23.8 Religious 43 21.5 126 21.1 169 21.2 Livelihood 9 4.5 48 8.0 57 7.2 Political / Government Organization 4 2.0 35 5.9 39 4.9 Environment 1 0.5 34 5.7 35 4.4 Cooperative 6 3.0 14 2.3 20 2.5 Irrigation 10 5.0 4 0.7 14 1.8 Loan Group 5 2.5 5 0.8 10 1.3 Water Association 3 0.5 3 0.4 *multiple response

Reasons for joining an organization. A number of reasons for joining organizations were cited by respondents. Foremost of these reasons was to help other people (46.4% of Non-REDD+ and 48.7% of REDD+ household respondents). Another important reason cited by households were to educate people and serve God (49.5% of Non-REDD+ and 38.9% of REDD+ households). Some Non- REDD+ (15.5%) and REDD+ (11.6%) respondents joined organizations for the benefits or assistance they give to their members. Being a community leader was another reason cited by 2.1% of the Non-REDD+ and 9.1% of the REDD+ households. Six point two percent of the Non-REDD+ and 5.8% of the REDD+ households joined an organization to gain more knowledge about livelihood and farming. Interestingly, to be able to plant trees (4.4% of REDD+ households) or put up potable water for the community (9.3% of Non-REDD+ households) also motivated others to join organizations.

Table 52. Reasons for joining village-level organizations Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % Help other people 45 46.4 134 48.7 179 48.1 Religious reason 48 49.5 107 38.9 155 41.7 To receive assistance 15 15.5 32 11.6 47 12.6 Obligation as a leader / member of 2 2.1 25 9.1 27 7.3 the community / coconut cultivator To gain knowledge about livelihood 6 6.2 16 5.8 22 5.9 / farming To avail loan 4 4.1 16 5.8 20 5.4 Other reasons 11 11.3 22 8.1 33 8.8 *multiple response

4.3.4 FACILITIES AVAILABLE

This section briefly discusses the availability of basic facilities and services available to the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study site villages. Access to these facilities such

44 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte as education and health care services may be considered as important indicators of the status and constraints to the development of the residents in the study sites that may have some bearing on the REDD+ project activities.

Educational facilities. The basic education of young children in the Philippines consists of six years elementary grade or grade school. The complete elementary education included the primary level (grades 1-4) and intermediate level (grades 5-6). In some remote villages, only the primary level is offered. In villages or barangays with larger population, complete elementary schools, that is, complete primary (grades 1- 4) and intermediate levels (grades 5-6), and even pre-primary programs (pre-school) are offered to children. These elementary schools are clustered and every cluster is called a district. In every district there is a central school that has pre-primary, primary, and intermediate levels. There are also schools that cater to students with special education needs and offer Special Education (SPED) programmes. As noted in Table 53, there is a higher number of elementary schools in the study sites except in Bontoc where there are 16 primary as well as 16 elementary schools. Of the study sites, the SPED schools only exist in Bontoc and Sogod, Southern Leyte.

Table 53. Number of public elementary schools as of 2010 Number of Schools District Total Elementary Primary Central SPED Bontoc 16 16 1 1 34 Sogod 17 9 1 1 28 Tomas Oppus 16 1 1 18 Silago 9 4 1 14 Maasin 21 8 1 30 Source: DepEd

Secondary education, commonly known as high school, consists of four levels - freshman to senior year. Like primary education, the government is mandated to offer free secondary education. To cater to various needs of children and parents, different types of schools exist in the country such as national high school, national vocational school, laboratory high school, and science high school. Science high schools are established for students with aptitude in Science and Mathematics, while laboratory high schools are usually operated by state colleges and universities. National high schools offer the basic secondary curriculum while national vocational high schools offer both secondary curriculum and vocational courses from agriculture, fishery to other technical / practical skills. In the five study sites, only Silago and Maasin have vocational high schools while the rest have secondary schools. Also, only Maasin has an integrated school wherein primary and secondary education is offered.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 45 Table 54. Classification of secondary schools as of 2010 Category of Secondary School District Total National HS Vocational HS Integrated School Bontoc 4 4 Silago 3 1 4 Sogod 3 3 Tomas Oppus 3 3 Maasin 10 1 1 12 Source: DepEd

Health facilities. Access to health facilities is important on the health status of the rural people. The available facilities in the study sites are hospitals, clinics, rural health unit (RHU), and barangay health centers. In the study sites, only Sogod and Maasin City have hospitals, though it can be noted that only Sogod has a private hospital. Being a city and the capital of Southern Leyte, however, there are more private clinics in Maasin compared to that of Sogod. Rural Health Unit (RHU) is available in all municipalities and three (RHUs) are established in Maasin City. As the provider of initial and basic health services, the barangay health centers are also available in most barangays. Its goal is to provide basic health services such as first aid, maternal, and child health care. The barangay health centers are staffed with barangay health workers (BHW) and a rural health midwife.

Table 55. Health facilities available in the study sites Hospital Area Private Clinics Rural Health Unit (RHU) Private Public Bontoc 1 1 Silago 1 Sogod 3 1 2 1 Tomas Oppus 1 Maasin 1 14 3 Source: Provincial Government of Southern Leyte

When queried about the existence of health facilities or services in their barangays, almost all of the households in both study sites claimed that they do not know of the existence of government and private hospitals, private clinic, rural health unit, and birthing facilities (Table 56). However, almost all (91%) of the households in the Non-REDD+ and a greater majority of those in the REDD+ sites (80.7%) claimed the existence of the barangay health centers. The above findings imply that access to health services in both REDD+ and Non-REDD+ areas is very limited since only barangay health centers are widely available and only minor illnesses can be handled by these facilities.

Recreational facilities. Basketball court is the most common recreational facilities found not only in urban but also in almost all rural and upland barangays in the Philippines. In the study area, almost all respondents said they have basketball courts in their respective barangays. Other recreational facilities available include playground as mentioned by 9% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 6.9% of

46 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte the REDD+ respondents. Some barangays have billiards facilities as reported by 30% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 39.4% of the REDD+ households.

Other facilities available. Other facilities found in the barangay include a local water system and electricity. Almost all of the farm-households have access to local water systems and electricity services.

Table 56. Health facilities present in the barangay Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Government hospital Yes 2 1.0 2 0.3 No 198 99.0 597 100.0 795 99.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Private hospital Yes 24 4.0 24 3.0 No 200 100.0 573 96.0 773 97.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Private Clinic Yes 2 0.3 2 0.3 No 200 100.0 595 99.7 795 99.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Rural Health Unit Yes 10 5.0 7 1.2 17 2.1 No 190 95.0 590 98.8 780 97.9 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Brgy. Health Center Yes 182 91.0 482 80.7 664 83.3 No 18 9.0 115 19.3 133 16.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Birthing Clinic Yes 9 4.5 7 1.2 16 2.0 No 191 95.5 590 98.8 781 98.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 47 Table 57. Recreational facilities present in the barangay Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Basketball court Yes 198 99.0 588 98.5 786 98.6 No 2 1.0 9 1.5 11 1.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Playground Yes 18 9.0 41 6.9 59 7.4 No 182 91.0 556 93.1 738 92.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Billiards Yes 60 30.0 235 39.4 295 37.0 No 140 70.0 362 60.6 502 63.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 58. Other facilities present in the barangay Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Local water system Yes 190 95.0 525 87.9 715 89.7 No 10 5.0 72 12.1 82 10.3 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Electricity Yes 197 98.5 572 95.8 769 96.5 No 3 1.5 25 4.2 28 3.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.3.5 FOOD ADEQUACY

Period of hunger. Hunger and malnutrition is still a problem in the project area. Hunger, as claimed by the household respondents, is a condition where there is a lack or absence of rice and other basic food they need to eat. Since rice is the most important crop and considered the staple food of Filipinos, households directly equate hunger on the adequacy or inadequacy of rice supply as food for their household.

When asked whether the household experienced hunger or when they have nothing to eat, only very few of the household respondents answered in the affirmative (Table 59). Only 8.1% of the Non-REDD+ households said there were times the family experienced hunger and 14.3% of the REDD+ households said they also experienced hunger. Food inadequacy could be attributed to low income and / or low farm productivity, insufficiently low household income for a given period, or to occurrences of natural calamities. The number of days that the family experienced hunger averaged at 2 and 8 days in a month for the Non-REDD+ and REDD+

48 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte families, respectively. They also experienced eating less at an average of 10 and 17 days for the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households, respectively (Table 60). REDD+ households experienced longer periods of hunger as compared to the Non-REDD+ households because they relatively have lower annual household income.

Table 59. Number of family that reported having experienced hunger Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Experience Hunger* Count % Count % Count % Yes 16 8.1 84 14.3 100 12.7 No 181 91.9 504 85.7 685 87.3 Total 197 100.0 588 100.0 785 100.0 *some household respondents did not answer the question.

Table 60. Average number of day household members experienced hunger or eating less Average Number Non-REDD+ REDD+ Mean Difference Experienced hunger 2 8 -5.87ns Experienced eating less 10 17 -7.09** ns=not significant, **significant at 5%

Months when the households experienced hunger. For households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites who claimed to have experienced hunger, a higher proportion claimed that they experienced it from January to March of the year (Table 61). As shown in the table, more REDD+ plus families experienced or suffered hunger than the Non-REDD+ families. The months of January to March, April, and August are considered off-season months especially for rice and, therefore, it is expected that the supply of rice during these months would be low and the price would be high. Moreover, the months of November to January are rainy months and income especially from off-farm and non-farm activities would be low during these months. As a result, households that experienced low income or lack of available rice for their household equate these months to periods of hunger because of lack of available staple food for the family.

Table 61. Months of the year when the family experienced hunger Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Month Experienced Hunger* Cases % Cases % Cases % Every month 1 1.2 1 1.0 January - March 6 40.0 28 33.7 34 34.7 April - June 3 20.0 11 13.2 14 14.3 July - September 3 20.0 21 25.3 24 24.6 October - December 3 20.0 22 26.5 25 25.6 *multiple response

Coping mechanisms when experiencing hunger. For the Non-REDD+ households, families who experienced hunger had varying coping mechanisms. A larger proportion (46.2%) said they increased their intake of liquids such as

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 49 water and coffee to appease their hunger; 30.8% claimed they substituted rice with rootcrops or bread and one said he worked on a daily wage basis so that he could buy food. For the REDD+ families, a higher proportion (49.4%) said they substituted rootcrops for rice, availed of credit (18.1%) to buy food; drink more liquid (14.5%); sleep through their hunger (6%); or eat rice porridge (6%). A few of them said they asked assistance from their parents, eat vegetables or worked as hired laborers. As can be gleaned from the table, the food shortage the respondents referred to is rice shortage, being the staple food of Filipinos. Filipinos like rice very much that even if other food items are consumed, without rice in the diet, there is no feeling of satisfaction. This is what hunger was to the households interviewed (Table 62).

Table 62. Coping mechanisms when experiencing hunger Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Coping Mechanisms* Cases % Cases % Cases % Substituted rice with root crops / bread 4 30.8 41 49.4 45 46.9 Avail of credit to buy food 3 23.1 15 18.1 18 18.8 Drink water / coffee 6 46.2 12 14.5 18 18.7 Sleep it out 5 6.0 5 5.2 Eat rice porridge 5 6.0 5 5.2 Look for job as hired worker with free meals 1 7.7 3 3.6 4 4.1 Eat coconut meat / vegetables 4 4.8 4 4.1 Assistance from parents / children / 3 6.3 3 3.1 neighbors Cooks twice a day 2 2.4 2 2.1 Buy rice 1 1.2 1 1.0 *multiple response

Coping mechanisms when experiencing less food. When food supply, which households mainly equate to rice supply, is not sufficient to meet the needs of the family, to get more food the household availed of credit (35.3%); substituted rootcrops for rice (63.2%); cooked rice mixed with rootcrops (4.4%); cook rice porridge (2.9%); asked assistance from neighbors (4.4%); and practiced frugality (2.9%) or thriftiness (Table 63). Others requested for any menial jobs in the neighborhood just so they can earn money for food. REDD+ households have the same coping mechanism as the Non-REDD+ households. The coping mechanism adopted is towards compensating insufficiency of rice supply such as substituting rootcrops for rice, and preparing rice porridge.

Perceptions on quantity of food. The respondents were asked whether food supply in the current year deteriorated as compared to last year. Generally, the perception about food supply by respondents was similar across the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ household groups (Table 64). Majority or a little over 50% of the respondents said food supply is still the same, while about 25% of the total households interviewed said their food supply has worsened. Almost one-fourth of the total households surveyed said food supply has improved since last year while a few had no idea about the current food supply situation.

50 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte When queried for the reasons behind the worsening food supply situation, Non- REDD+ respondents (50%) said food supply deteriorated due to farm related problems such as low productivity caused by declining soil fertility. The same reason was echoed by 47.3% of the REDD+ households (Table 65). Financial problem was another reason why food supply decreases because of their inability to buy additional food supply as reported by 27.5% of those Non-REDD+ households who said food supply had deteriorated. Approximately 24% of the REDD+ respondents also cited the same reason behind food supply decreases during the current year as compared to last year. Increasing prices of food products reinforced the financial problem because it made food items unaffordable. Other minor reasons mentioned were occurrence of calamities, high prices of food products, illness and old age. Natural calamities contributed to the high food prices because their occurrence affected production and, consequently, supply.

Table 63. Coping mechanisms of household when food supply is insufficient Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Coping Mechanisms* Cases % Cases % Cases % Substituted rice with rootcrops / bread 43 63.2 184 66.2 228 65.9 Avail of credit 24 35.3 54 19.5 78 22.5 Worked on a daily basis 4 5.9 17 6.1 21 6.1 Eat rice porridge 2 2.9 14 5.0 16 4.6 Mixed rice with rootcrops 3 4.4 11 4.0 14 4.1 Plant vegetables 1 1.5 11 4.0 12 3.4 Sought assistance from children / neighbors 3 4.4 6 2.1 9 2.7 / parents Practiced thrift 2 2.9 7 2.6 9 2.6 Drink water / coffee 1 1.5 6 2.2 7 2.1 Eat rice with dried fish and salt 3 1.1 3 0.9 Sold the buffalo / farm products 2 0.8 2 0.6 Cook the homegrown livestock or poultry 1 0.4 1 0.3 *multiple response

Table 64. Respondents’ perception about quantity of food supply Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Quantity of Food Count % Count % Count % Worsened 47 23.7 145 25.2 192 24.8 The same 100 50.5 299 51.9 399 51.6 Improved 49 24.7 129 22.4 178 23.0 Don’t know 2 1.0 3 0.5 5 0.6 Total 198 100.0 576 100.0 774 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 51 Table 65. Reasons for deteriorating food supply condition Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % Farm-related problems 20 50.0 44 47.3 64 48.0 Financial problem 11 27.5 22 23.7 33 24.8 High prices of goods 4 10.0 16 17.2 20 15.0 Affected by calamities 1 2.5 7 7.5 8 6.0 Household size has increased 1 2.5 4 4.3 5 4.1 Other reasons 4 10.0 5 5.5 9 7.0 *multiple response

Perceptions / Reasons for improved food supply. Not all household respondents experienced hunger out of insufficient food supply. Those who said food supply has improved cited a number of reasons for this. For the Non-REDD+ households, 43% of those who said food supply improved claimed that crop yields are better this year providing them sufficient income to support the family. This improvement in crop yield is due to favorable weather and the use of improved crop varieties. The same reason was mentioned by 56.4% of the REDD+ respondents who experienced improved food supply situation (Table 66). Also, households have other sources of income and this was mentioned by 28.6% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 18% of the REDD+ respondents. Some families also received financial support from their children and other family members which augmented household income enabling them to buy sufficient food for the family. Case in point, more than 17% of the Non-REDD+ households and 14.4% of the REDD+ households said support from children augmented the household income. Decrease household size and support from NGO and landowner also supplemented household income.

Table 66. Reasons for improved food supply Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons For Improved Food Supply* Cases % Cases % Cases % Better yield / income from the farm 12 43.0 47 56.4 59 53.1 to support the family Having another source of income 8 28.6 15 18.0 23 20.7 aside from farming Supported by children and other 5 17.9 12 14.4 17 15.3 members of the family Household size has decreased 4 14.3 10 12.0 14 12.6 Supported by NGO / Landowner 2 2.4 2 1.8 *multiple response

52 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4.4 CREDIT AND LOAN INFORMATION

More often than not households from rural areas have inadequate money to finance farming and other livelihood activities. Most of them resort to borrowing money either for production or for consumption, i.e. used to procure farm inputs to increase productivity or for food consumption of the family (Ruben and Clercx, 2003). Hence, the presence of credit services is essential in rural areas in order to enhance the welfare of the households. There are various credit and loan services available in the country under formal and informal credit arrangements. Formal credit services are offered by bank institutions, cooperatives, and some government institutions with credit and loan programmes while informal credits are derived from neighbors, relatives, and other private lenders. Despite of the existence of formal credit programmes in the country, farming households go to informal loan sources even if the interest rate is high because of flexible procedures, on time release of funds, and unconventional forms of collateral. Notably, formal credit and loan services require collateral and the capability of the borrower to pay (Poliquit, 2006).

Sources of credit. Lending institutions which included cooperatives, banks, government institution and informal credit sources are available in Southern Leyte. Motorcycle and / or appliance merchandisers were also cited as a credit source for the household. These merchandisers extended motorcycle and appliance loans to households on installment basis. At the time of the survey, only 73 of the Non- REDD+ households and 253 of the REDD+ households had availed of credit from any of these institutions. These number cited credit cooperatives as the mostly availed lending institutions (56.3% Non-REDD+ households and 51.6% REDD+ households). Membership in a cooperative, however, is a pre-requisite for a loan. Banks were another source of credit as mentioned by 16.4% of Non-REDD+ and 9.9% of REDD+ households (Table 67). Rural banks specifically catered small farmers and their agricultural development needs. A small portion (3%) of the total respondents also availed loans from government institutions while the rest borrowed from private lenders.

Table 67. Kinds of lending institutions Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Lending Institutions Count % Count % Count % Cooperatives 41 56.3 130 51.6 171 52.5 Informal Credit Sources 9 12.3 75 29.7 84 25.8 Bank Institution 12 16.4 25 9.9 37 11.3 Motorcycle / Appliances 7 9.7 17 6.7 24 7.3 Merchandiser Government Institution 4 5.4 6 2.4 10 3.0 Total 73 100.0 253 100.0 326 100.0

Type of loans availed. Regular loan was the mostly availed type of loan among majority of Non-REDD+ (98.6%) and REDD+ (86.1%) household respondents who were members of a credit cooperative. Agreeably, regular loan has low interest

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 53 rate (12% per annum) and a declining interest scheme based on the regularity of payments made by the borrower and the amount that can be availed by members through regular loan is twice the money s / he deposited. Some of the households also relied on cash advances either from private lenders or regular buyers (suki) (Table 68). Emergency loans were also availed by 9.6% and 6.8% of the Non- REDD+ and REDD+ household borrowers. This type of loan is intended for emergency purposes. Five point five percent of Non-REDD+ and of REDD+ respondents who are GSIS members availed of policy loans. A policy loan, mostly through GSIS which uses the cash value of the member’s life insurance policy as collateral, is common in the country.

Purpose of the loans availed. Half of the Non-REDD+ (56.2%) and 42.6% of the REDD+ household respondents availed loans to finance some family expenses and to purchase furniture. To finance a business was also one of the purposes in availing loans according to the 24.7% Non-REDD+ and 26.5% REDD+ households. Some of the Non-REDD+ (15.1%) and the REDD+ (12.9%) household borrowers incurred loans to finance the education of children. A few (4.1%) of the Non- REDD+ and a relatively higher number of REDD+ (12%) household borrowers availed of loans to buy a motorcycle. A relatively higher number of Non-REDD+ borrowers availed of motorcycle loans for transportation purposes since they live in the uplands. Eleven percent of the Non-REDD+ and 4.4% of the REDD+ households availed of loans to pay other debt. Other reasons cited for borrowing were to purchase land or medicine or to finance emergency and / or special occasions (Table 69).

Credit facilities available in the barangays. As shown in Table 70, almost all of the respondents reported that they are not aware of the existence of credit and / or related financial services being made available in thebarangays . However, as observed, there are informal sources of credit that respondents have availed of such as private money lenders and traders to whom they sell their products. In some cases, farmers preferred to borrow from informal sources even if they charged high interest rates because of their easy access and non-stringent credit requirements compared to the institutional sources. Moreover, farm-households have also established “interlinked transactions” with their creditors since these creditors provide not only credit facilities for their farm inputs and household needs but also serve as market outlets of their produce.

Table 68. Types of loan availed by the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Types of Loan* Cases % Cases % Cases % Regular 72 98.6 204 86.1 276 89.0 Good for / Cash Advance 5 6.8 26 11.0 31 10.0 Emergency 7 9.6 16 6.8 23 7.4 Policy 4 5.5 13 5.5 17 5.5 Other types of loan** 1 1.4 7 3.0 8 2.6 *multiple response **(motorcycle loan, 5-6, and every 5 months)

54 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 69. Purpose of loan Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Purpose of Loan* Cases % Cases % Cases % Household expenses and furniture 41 56.2 106 42.6 147 45.7 For business capital 18 24.7 66 26.5 84 26.1 For education expenses 11 15.1 32 12.9 43 13.4 For motorcycle 3 4.1 30 12.0 33 10.2 To pay another debt 8 11.0 11 4.4 19 5.9 For land purpose 3 4.1 12 4.8 15 4.7 Other purposes** 6 8.2 17 6.8 23 7.1 *multiple response **(hospital bills payment, medicines, for emergency, special occasion)

Table 70. Credit facilities present in the barangay Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Rural bank Yes 10 1.7 10 1.3 No 200 100.0 587 98.3 787 98.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Credit cooperative Yes 17 8.5 18 3.0 35 4.4 No 183 91.5 579 97.0 762 95.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Other cooperative Yes 8 4.0 13 2.2 21 2.6 No 192 96.0 584 97.8 776 97.4 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 55 [This page is left intentionally blank.] 4.5 MARKETING OF FARM PRODUCTS

Crops produced and marketed by farmers. Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households produced and marketed a variety of crops. The most commonly marketed agricultural crop was coconut as reported by 93.9% and 86.8% of Non- REDD+ and REDD+ households, respectively. Root crops were also marketed by 7.8% of Non-REDD+ and 25.8% of REDD+ respondents. Banana was also produced and marketed by 8.9% of Non-REDD+ and 22.1% of REDD+ respondents. Moreover, 3.4% of Non-REDD+ households and 10.8% REDD+ households produced and sold abaca fiber. Fruit trees were also cited as sources of income for 5% and 4.2% of Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households, respectively. Even though rice is a staple food and is widely consumed in every household, farmers still had rice surplus in which 5% of Non-REDD+ and 2.3% of REDD+ respondents managed to sell. Nineteen REDD+ farmers (3.6%) grew and marketed vegetables to augment household income. Only one Non-REDD+ household grew vegetables. Some farmers also had forest trees in their farms which are also potential sources of income. Almost four percent of Non-REDD+ households and a little more than 2% of REDD+ households grew forest trees and marketed tree products such as lumber. There were seven farmers in REDD+ households who grew and marketed corn. Eight REDD+ farmers planted pineapple while five planted coffee. Table 71. Crops produced and / or marketed by the farmers Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut 168 93.9 460 86.8 628 88.6 Rootcrops 14 7.8 137 25.8 151 21.3 Banana 16 8.9 117 22.1 133 18.8 Abaca 6 3.4 57 10.8 63 8.9 Fruits 9 5.0 22 4.2 31 4.4 Rice 9 5.0 12 2.3 21 3.0 Vegetables 1 0.6 19 3.6 20 2.8 Forest Trees 7 3.9 11 2.1 18 2.5 Corn 1 0.6 7 1.3 8 1.1 Pineapple 8 1.5 8 1.1 Coffee 5 0.9 5 0.7 *multiple response

Primary market outlet. Coconut was the most common crop produced and marketed by REDD+ and Non-REDD+ household respondents. The main product derived from coconut is copra. Based on the survey results, about 56.1% of the households sold copra to regular buyers or local copra buyers. Others also sold copra to buying stations and some to their neighbors / relatives. This was true for households in both sites. A relatively bigger percentage of Non-REDD+ (12.8%) respondents compared to REDD+ (9.9%) respondents sold their copra to traders. In contrast, 13.2% of REDD+ respondents preferred to sell their copra in market outlets than to traders (Appendix Table 4).

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 57 Other crops produced by households were rootcrops, banana, and abaca. A bigger number of households producing these crops were from the REDD+ communities. Difference on choices of market outlets was observed between the two areas. For example, the common market outlets for REDD+ households for these type of crops were neighbors / relatives and regular buyers although the market (57.1%) was still one of the selling outlets for banana and buying station (43.8%) for abaca fibers. In Non-REDD+ communities, four respondents marketed rootcrops to the market and two respondents sold their banana products to this same market outlet. Rootcrops and banana were also sold to neighbors and money lenders, respectively. Buying station was the only reported market outlet for abaca fiber in the Non- REDD+ areas (Appendix Tables 7, 15 and 18).

Only few households from both sites produced and marketed rice (3% of the total household respondents). As mentioned earlier, rice being a staple food is primarily intended for home consumption. Seven households with marketable surplus sold their produce to rice millers and / or traders, while some sold to their neighbors / relatives, and regular buyers (Appendix Table 11).

It can be noted that households from REDD+ communities were the only one who marketed fruits and vegetables though this only comprised a very small fraction of the total household respondents. Traders were the primary market outlet for fruits while vegetables were sold to buying stations and regular buyers (Appendix Tables 21 and 24).

In general, the most common market outlets for crops were regular buyers and neighbors / relatives. Regular buyers are also known in local term as “suki”. Selling products to suki is economical than transporting to the market when the volume of the crops to be sold is small.

Reason for choice of market. Choosing the market outlets depends on different reasons. For instance, the buying price is the first thing a copra seller would consider even before harvesting the nuts. This tendency was confirmed by 41.4% of Non- REDD+ and 34.6% REDD+ household respondents. It is also worth noting that 38.3% of the REDD+ households chose regularity of the buyer as one of the reasons in choosing the market (Appendix Table 5). Another reason mentioned by copra sellers was the probability and ease of availing loan from the buyers. Also, other farmers opted to sell their copra within their barangay even if the buying price is lower than in other markets due to the high transportation cost incurred in selling copra to town.

The reasons above were also cited by farmers with marketable abaca, banana, and rootcrops. Buying price was an important factor in choosing market outlet, especially for the sole Non-REDD+ household selling abaca. Eleven out of 29 REDD+ households also cited price as one of the factors in choosing the market for banana. Another reason was regularity of the buyer especially where banana and rootcrops are concerned. However, three Non-REDD+ households with marketable rootcrops stated that the large number of buyers in the barangay was the

58 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte top reason for selling the crop to their market of choice. Less transportation cost mattered more to the REDD+ households in considering the market for rootcrops and banana. The possibility of availing money from the buyer was another factor considered especially by REDD+ households in choosing market outlets for banana and abaca (Appendix Tables 8, 16 and 19).

The primary reason in choosing the market for rice was the possibility of availing loans from the buyer. Four Non-REDD+ households with marketable rice surplus cited this reason. Regularity of the buyer was a factor in choosing market outlet for two REDD+ households in (Appendix Table 12). This was also cited by REDD+ households who had marketable fruits and vegetables (Appendix Table 22 and 25).

Mode of transportation when marketing crops. The availability and types of transport services is critical in marketing crops. There were different transport services found in the study areas. In transporting copra, 53% of the REDD+ and 36.5% of the Non-REDD+ households manually transported their produce that is, carried them by hand or on their shoulders. Other households used motorcycle also called “habal-habal” in Cebuano as mode of transportation for copra. Jeep was also used in transporting the product (23.1% of the Non-REDD+ household respondents used this type of transportation). Other means of transportation were tricycle, carabao, and bus or multicab (Appendix Table 6).

Abaca, banana, and rootcrops were commonly transported from the farm to the house or the market by hand or on the shoulders. This mode of transportation was employed since many of the households sold their crops to their neighbors / relatives and to local buyers who are in close proximity to the farmers. Two Non- REDD+ households who marketed abaca cited this as their primary means of transportation. Motorcycle or habal-habal was also used in transporting these crops, especially by the 20 REDD+ households to market their abaca and 13 respondents from the same group to market rootcrops and banana. Rootcrops were either delivered right to the buyer or picked up on the road side (Appendix Table 10). Some farmers transported crops by tricycle and truck (Appendix Tables 9, 17 and 20).

Tricycle was the common mode in transporting rice in both areas. However, six Non-REDD+ households with marketable surplus preferred truck to tricycle. Other households from REDD+ opted ­habal-habal to truck in transporting rice. As shown in Appendix Table 13, rice was directly delivered to the buyer, though some were picked up on the road side (Appendix Table 14).

Fruits and vegetables were also transported through the same transport services. Vegetables were transported primarily through habal-habal or motorcycle. Some also chose to carry vegetables by hand. Manual means of transportation was also employed by these households in selling fruits (Appendix Tables 23 and 26).

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 59 It can be observed that many of the households were still transporting their crops to their choice of market manually. This mode of transporting crops is applicable if the market is a walking-distance and the value of marketable surplus is low. Motor vehicles were also employed such as motorcycle or habal-habal, tricycle, jeep, and truck in transporting crops. These means of transportation are essential if the distance from farm / home to market outlets is farther and the crops were heavy and in bigger volume.

All other things equal, distance of the farm from the market is an important factor to consider when deciding what crops to grow. Crops that are bulky to transport relative to their value should be grown in farms closer to the market or to the processing plants.

60 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4.6 ACCESS TO LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES

This section discusses how the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites gained access to their farms and to existing natural resources in the villages, which undoubtedly must come from the forests. Discussion on resource utilization puts emphasis on wildlife hunting and timber harvesting owing to the economic significance of these activities.

4.6.1 ACCESS TO LAND

Access to land may refer to the ability of households to use land and other resources such as water and trees, control these resources, and transfer land rights in order to take advantage of other opportunities. Practically all respondents had access to land for farming; however, such access does not necessarily involve recognized tenure arrangement. Access to land without clear tenure arrangement was common across Non-REDD+ (96.5%) and REDD+ (87.3%) sites (Table 72). For those with tenure arrangement, majority gained access to land through formal arrangement and the rest through informal or customary arrangement (Table 73).

Table 72. Distribution of farm-households according to existence of land tenure arrangement Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Tenure Agreement Cases % Cases % Cases % Yes 7 3.5 76 12.7 83 10.4 No 193 96.5 521 87.3 714 89.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 73. Distribution of farm-households according to nature of tenure arrangement Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Nature of Tenure Arrangement* Cases % Cases % Cases % Formal or with document 5 71.4 61 93.8 66 91.7 Informal / customary informal 2 28.6 13 20.0 15 20.8 *multiple response

Ownership of land comes in various forms (Table 74) with individual ownership as the most common form being adhered to. Communal ownership ranked second which was uncommon unless a government program which is anchored on communal form of resource use like the CBFM exists in the community. Communal ownership was even higher among Non-REDD+ respondents whose land parcels are mostly situated outside timberland. Conjugal ownership of the husband and wife and partnership among siblings were also observed. The latter was evident among siblings of original land holders.

Several categories of land tenure were used to describe the attachment of respondents to the land they are tilling (Table 75). A major share of the land tenure status fell under owner-cultivated and share tenancy. It is worthy to note, however,

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 61 that a big proportion (17.8%) did not have any attachment to the land they are currently cultivating, being simply farm workers. Others (3.3%) were cultivating the land based on free access which, although provisionally acceptable mostly in remote communities where value of land is less appreciated, remains a form of illegal occupancy.

Table 74. Distribution of farm-households according to nature of land ownership Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Nature of Land Ownership* Cases % Cases % Cases % Individual 167 83.5 460 77.6 627 79.1 Communal 122 61.0 326 55.0 448 56.5 Conjugal 61 30.5 168 28.3 229 28.9 Partnership 9 4.5 20 3.4 29 3.7 *multiple response

Table 75. Distribution of farm-households according to land tenure Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Tenure* Cases % Cases % Cases % Owner-cultivated 231 100.0 663 100.0 894 100.0 Share tenancy 169 84.5 396 66.7 565 71.1 Farm worker 39 19.5 102 17.2 141 17.8 Share ownership 20 10.0 46 7.7 66 8.3 Free access / use of land 2 1.0 24 4.0 26 3.3 Leasehold 5 2.5 12 2.0 17 2.1 Mortgage land 3 1.5 8 1.3 11 1.4 Amortize land 6 3.0 4 0.7 10 1.3 Claimed land 9 1.5 9 1.1 *multiple response

The most dominant mode of land acquisition was inheritance followed by verbal agreement with the original claimant or owner (Table 76). The next dominant mode was buying the land from its rightful owner. Others acquired lands through government programs like agrarian reform and social forestry, which are the legal basis of land acquisition within timberland or public domain. For example, under the agrarian reform program of DAR, EP and CLOA are issued to the beneficiaries who can avail of the Torrens title system. Under the ISFP of the DENR, CSC is issued. Presumably, most of the first wave settlers in mountainbarangays , being part of the public domain where absolute land titling is not possible, must have acquired legal basis of land ownership through this program. Through the years, ownership or rights may have been transferred to next-of-kin by virtue of inheritance and by verbal agreement with relatives or close family friends when the original holders were no longer able to cultivate their farm parcels due to old age. Some owners ended up selling their lands to other people which is not allowed under the ISF program of the DENR.

Rights were also acquired by few respondents through direct occupancy inside timberland as evident among REDD+ respondents, which is essentially illegal.

62 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Occupancy was usually made in areas previously tilled by legal beneficiaries of upland development programs. Other settlers, however, opened up new areas for cultivation inside timberland.

Table 76. Distribution of farm-household according to mode of land acquisition Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Mode of Acquisition* Cases % Cases % Cases % Inherited 198 100.0 540 93.8 738 95.6 Verbal agreement 163 83.2 353 61.3 516 66.8 Bought 66 33.7 166 28.8 232 30.1 Through agrarian reform 31 15.8 77 13.4 108 14.0 Stewardship agreement (ISFP) 5 2.6 25 4.3 30 3.9 Direct occupancy 26 4.5 26 3.4 Through mortgage 4 2.0 17 2.9 21 2.7 Written agreement 8 1.4 8 1.0 Other tenurial arrangements 2 1.0 7 1.2 9 1.1 *multiple response

Among share-tenants, the most dominant sharing system for both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents was 1:1 followed by 3:1 (Table 77). Under 1:1 sharing scheme, production inputs will be provided by the owner and labor by the tenant. After deducting the cost of inputs, the net produce will be divided equally between owner and tenant. In schemes other than 1:1, the one who provided the inputs usually will get the bigger share of the produce.

Table 77. Distribution of farm-households according to sharing arrangement (for share-tenant) Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Sharing Arrangement* Cases % Cases % Cases % 1:1 118 94.4 296 99.0 414 97.6 3:1 67 53.6 120 40.1 187 44.1 1:3 5 4.0 18 6.0 23 5.4 2:1 9 7.2 8 2.7 17 4.0 4:1 1 0.8 15 5.0 16 3.8 3:2 3 2.4 6 2.0 9 2.1 1:2 2 1.6 6 2.0 8 1.9 1:6 1 0.8 3 1.0 4 0.9 *multiple response

Regarding the status of ownership, most Non-REDD+ respondents possessed lands which are titled; a big majority also possessed land without titles. In the same manner, most REDD+ respondents possessed land without titles while a big proportion also owned land with titles. Ownership of some respondents for both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ is supported by tax declaration (Table 78). For both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents, the high cost associated with titling was the most cited reason for not having their land titled (Table 79). One major constraint for titling cited by respondents was the status of the lands they are tilling.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 63 Some parcels are situated inside timberland or public domain where absolute title is not possible to obtain. Another reason was the long process involved particularly in subdividing lots from the original deed. It is interesting to note that some were still waiting for the release of the title they applied for as of survey time. This may further substantiate the claim of some respondents that the titling process is tedious and lengthy.

Table 78. Distribution of farm-households according to status of land ownership Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Status* Cases % Cases % Cases % Titled 217 100.0 376 63.3 593 74.7 Not titled 147 73.5 493 83.0 640 80.6 Declaration 13 6.5 104 17.5 117 14.7 Don’t know / no response 105 52.5 297 50.0 402 50.6 *multiple response

Table 79. Reasons why the land is not titled Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % High cost of titling and transfer 61 68.5 257 70.4 318 70.0 Land is inside public domain where 22 24.7 97 26.6 119 26.2 absolute titling is not possible Lengthy process of subdividing land from 17 19.1 64 17.5 81 17.8 original deed Processing is underway 16 18.0 55 15.1 71 15.6 No idea on the titling process 2 2.2 11 3.0 13 2.8 Conflict among children 6 1.6 6 1.3 No agent to facilitate the titling process 5 1.4 5 1.1 Others 2 2.2 4 1.1 6 1.3 *multiple response

When asked whether they have heard of cases where households lost their land due to lack of proof of ownership, majority of the respondents in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites answered they never heard of such a case (Table 80). Some admitted they rarely heard of and very few said they regularly heard of such a case. This shows that within these farming communities concrete proof of ownership, which can be translated into security, is not as important as the visible improvement of their farms which may serve as monumental evidence of ownership or signify right of occupancy. In cases where absolute title was not possible to obtain, the presence of perennial crops like coconut which is tantamount to occupancy was provisionally understood and respected in most upland barangays aside from the fact that cases of illegal occupants being ejected from their occupied land was rarely heard of due to laxity of the concerned agencies in implementing the laws.

64 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 80. Distribution of farm-households whether they have heard cases of land lost due to lack of proof of ownership Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Heard cases of lost land Count % Count % Count % Never 141 70.5 365 61.1 506 63.5 Rarely 48 24.0 184 30.8 232 29.1 Regularly 9 4.5 43 7.2 52 6.5 No answer 2 1.0 5 0.8 7 0.9 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.6.2 ACCESS TO NATURAL RESOURCES

Majority (56.4%) of the REDD+ respondents and below one-half (43.5%) of the Non-REDD+ respondents had access to natural resources. This difference can be explained by mere physical location of the respondents. Understandably, REDD+ communities were situated closer to the forests. Access to forests from residence or from farm was made possible generally by trail being the only available access to the site. In areas where there is dirt road, single motorcycle for hire or habal- habal is available. Few respondents used horse and carabaos for transport (Table 81, 82 & 83). The result indicates that accessibility to the sources of the naturally occurring plants and wildlife resources is generally difficult, thus preventing massive exploitation of resources.

Table 81. Distribution of respondents according to access to natural resources Access to Natural Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Resources Count % Count % Count % Yes 87 43.5 337 56.4 424 53.2 No 113 56.5 260 43.6 373 46.8 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 65 Table 82. Distribution of respondents according to means of access to the sources / location of natural resources Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Accessibility Count % Count % Count % Accessibility from house to forest Foot 126 86.3 433 89.5 559 88.7 Habal-habal 13 8.9 27 5.6 40 6.3 Carabao 7 4.8 22 4.5 29 4.6 Horse ride 1 0.2 1 0.2 Bus 1 0.2 1 0.2 Total 146 100.0 484 100.0 630 100.0 Accessibility from house to farm Foot 164 86.3 511 88.9 675 88.2 Habal-habal 17 8.9 39 6.8 56 7.3 Carabao 6 3.2 21 3.7 27 3.5 Horse ride 1 0.5 3 0.5 4 0.5 Bus 2 1.1 1 0.2 3 0.4 Total 190 100.0 575 100.0 765 100.0 Accessibility from farm to forest Foot 135 93.8 437 95.4 572 95.0 Habal-habal 5 3.5 8 1.7 13 2.2 Carabao 2 1.4 13 2.8 15 2.5 Horse ride 2 1.4 2 0.3 Total 144 100.0 458 100.0 602 100.0

Table 83. Distribution of respondents according to road type available in the sources / location of natural resources Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Road Type Count % Count % Count % From House to forest Concrete road 5 3.4 12 2.5 17 2.7 All-weather road 33 22.8 107 22.2 140 22.4 Trail 107 73.8 362 75.3 469 74.9 Total 145 100.0 481 100.0 626 100.0 From House to farm Concrete road 10 5.1 17 2.9 27 3.5 All-weather road 57 28.9 138 23.6 195 24.9 Trail 130 66.0 430 73.5 560 71.6 Total 197 100.0 585 100.0 782 100.0 From Farm to forest Concrete road 2 1.4 7 1.5 9 1.5 All-weather road 19 13.1 36 7.6 55 8.9 Trail 124 85.5 428 90.9 552 89.6 Total 145 100.0 471 100.0 616 100.0

66 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Hunting. A remarkable number of respondents (both Non-REDD+ and REDD+) reported that they were aware of hunting activities in their locality (Table 84). The most commonly hunted wildlife was monitor lizard followed by birds, civets, jungle fowl, wild pig and monkey (Table 85). Snake and bats were also hunted by some respondents. Deer was also hunted but was reported by very few respondents. An overwhelming majority of the respondents indicated that hunting is for subsistence or home consumption only (Table 86). Frequency of hunting varies from once a month to once a year with the former frequently cited by both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents (Table 87).

It is worth noting that species which were not commonly hunted before like monitor lizards and civets due to a less appreciated meat taste are now at the top of the list of hunted species. This less appreciated taste prevents hunters to trade their catch to other members of the community, thus hunting of such species is limited to wildlife consumption only.

The result indicates that monitor lizards and civets are the ones abundant in the locality owing to the disturbed condition of the sites. This further suggests that the population of big mammals like wild pig and deer which are considered most sought game species are already declining. This could be due to overhunting in the past years confounded by habitat destruction. Deer is an excellent indicator of intact forest being an interior species. Yet, its being the least hunted species in the list suggests that there must be a tremendous habitat transformation occurring in their home range resulting to heavy decline in population.

Table 84. Distribution of respondents according to awareness of hunting activities in the locality Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Awareness Count % Count % Count % Yes 133 66.5 437 73.2 570 71.5 No 67 33.5 160 26.8 227 28.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 85. Distribution of respondents according to the kind of wildlife they are hunting Kind of Wildlife Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Hunted* Cases % Cases % Cases % Monitor Lizard 166 123.9 440 101.1 606 106.5 Birds 102 42.5 376 86.3 478 83.0 Civet 49 36.6 184 42.4 233 41.0 Jungle fowl 43 32.1 139 32.0 182 32.0 Wild pig 19 14.2 133 30.6 152 26.7 Monkey 19 14.2 97 22.3 116 20.4 Snake 16 11.9 85 19.5 101 17.8 Bats 9 6.7 15 3.4 24 4.2 Deer 1 0.7 5 1.1 6 1.1 *multiple response

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 67 Table 86. Personal consumption of the hunted animals Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Personal Consumption Count % Count % Count % Yes 125 94.0 417 97.7 542 96.8 No 8 6.0 10 2.3 18 3.2 Total 133 100.0 427 100.0 560 100.0

Table 87. Distribution of respondents according to frequency of hunting Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Frequency of Hunting Count % Count % Count % Daily 2 2.2 9 3.1 11 2.9 Every week 7 7.9 37 12.9 44 11.7 Every two weeks 8 8.9 38 13.2 46 12.2 Once a month 50 56.2 137 47.9 187 49.9 Every two months 3 1.0 3 0.8 Every four months 1 1.1 6 2.0 7 1.9 Every six months 1 1.1 6 2.1 7 1.9 Once a year 1 1.1 1 0.3 Seldom 19 21.3 50 17.5 69 18.4 Total 89 100.0 286 100.0 375 100.0

Table 88. Distribution of respondents according to awareness of illegal logging in the area Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Awareness Count % Count % Count % Yes 25 12.5 160 26.8 185 23.2 No 175 87.5 437 73.2 612 76.8 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

The results show that topping the list of timber harvested for own construction use and for trade were generally the planted exotic species like yemane and mahogany. However, also topping the list were banned premium timber species like narra and molave including lauan, a dipterocarp species which is traded for general construction use. It is not surprising if people are harvesting yemane and mahogany because these species have become the icons of reforestation in the country and are accepted even among smallholders in almost every part of the country. What is disturbing to note is the continuous harvesting and trading of banned premium timber species, the bulk of which must come from the remaining forest fragments. The result connotes that such illegal activity continues because violators may be provisionally allowed to do so by authorities for humanitarian consideration or because of low detection rate owing to laxity on the side of the regulatory agency.

68 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 89. Distribution of respondents according to the kind of trees being cut in the area Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Common Name* Cases % Cases % Cases % Yemane 9 34.6 62 39.5 71 38.8 Molave 4 15.4 64 40.7 68 37.2 Narra 6 23.1 59 37.6 65 35.5 Lauan 8 30.8 48 30.6 56 30.6 Mahogany 6 23.1 23 14.6 29 15.8 Toog 25 15.9 25 13.7 Other forest trees 5 19.2 20 12.7 25 13.6 Ipil-ipil 3 11.5 21 13.3 24 13.1 Antipolo 6 23.0 9 5.8 15 7.7 Bagalunga 1 3.8 12 7.6 13 7.1 Sagimsiman 2 7.7 8 5.1 10 5.5 Binunga 2 7.6 8 4.8 10 5.0 Bakan 1 3.8 5 3.2 6 3.3 Lanipga 2 7.6 3 1.9 5 2.7 Alagasi 4 2.6 4 2.2 Fruit trees 2 7.6 1 0.6 3 1.5 Tindalo 2 1.3 2 1.1 2 1.3 2 1.1 *multiple response

Table 90. Distribution of respondents according to trading points of lumber from trees being cut Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Trading Points of Lumber Count % Count % Count % Within the barangay 5 41.7 11 11.9 16 15.4 Town / City proper 7 58.3 79 85.9 86 82.7 Outside the province 2 2.2 2 1.9 Total 12 100.0 92 100.0 104 100.0

Table 91. Distribution of respondents according to frequency of cutting trees Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Frequency of Cutting Trees Count % Count % Count % Daily 1 6.7 4 3.9 5 4.3 Every week 10 9.8 10 8.5 Every two weeks 4 26.7 5 4.9 9 7.7 Once a month 8 53.3 53 52.0 61 52.1 Every two months 1 1.0 1 0.9 Every six months 5 4.9 5 4.3 Once a year 1 1.0 1 0.9 Seldom 2 13.3 23 22.5 25 21.4 Total 15 100.0 102 100.0 117 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 69 [This page is left intentionally blank.] 4.7 FARM CHARACTERISTICS AND UPLAND FARMING SYSTEM

In the Philippines, agriculture is the primary means of livelihood and oftentimes the only source of income among the upland dwellers. Most of the farms are subsistence with very limited marketable surplus. Incidence of poverty in the uplands is high and is caused by declining farm productivity, smaller farm sizes and unsustainable farm practices which led to deforestation (IFAD, 2010). They have limited access to productive assets and business activities and have few non-farm income generating activities.

4.7.1 NUMBER OF PARCELS AND FARM AREA CULTIVATED

The average farm area cultivated by farm households in the two study sites is shown in Table 92. Considering all the farm parcels or farm lots, the average farm area cultivated by the sample farm households in the five study sites is 4.03 hectares and the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households cultivated an average of 3.46 and 4.22 hectares, respectively.

Table 92. Number of parcels and farm area cultivated Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Item Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median No. of Parcels Cultivated 2.40 2.00 2.10 2.00 2.17 2.00 Farm Area 3.46 2.50 4.22 2.75 4.03 2.75

4.7.2 CROPPING SYSTEMS AND CROPS PLANTED

Historically, abaca-based intercrop was the dominant cropping system in the upland areas of Southern Leyte. The abaca-based intercrop was generally practiced in newly opened relatively bigger land parcels. Normally, sloping areas which constitute a big proportion of the farm were devoted to abaca while relatively flat areas were for some staples, rootcrops and vegetables. Abaca is usually intercropped with coconut strategically spaced so as not to compete with abaca for light and moisture. The native tree species, anii (Erythrina fusca) is also planted as nurse crop and is preferred over coconut because of its significant contribution in moisture conservation.

Production of staples, vegetables and other short-term crops was an integral component of the overall production system because they are the main source of subsistence and cash in between harvest time for abaca. Abaca is harvested every six months; hence the contribution of short-term crops is very important.

But with the infestation of the abaca bunchy top virus (ABTV), which practically wiped out abaca, there is a significant shift in the cropping system in Southern Leyte from abaca to coconut. The result of the study revealed that the current cropping systems in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites include multiple cropping, intercropping, agro-forestry, and mono-cropping (Table 93). It must be noted that,

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 71 there are respondents who reported practicing a combination of two or more of the aforementioned cropping systems. For example, even if a considerable portion of respondents dominantly practiced multi-cropping in their first farm parcels, they could also be practicing intercropping, mono-cropping and agro-forestry (as in the case of the REDD+ group) in certain areas of the farm.

Intercropping is the practice of growing two or more crops in proximity. The most common goal of intercropping is to produce a greater yield on a given piece of land by making use of resources that would otherwise not be utilized by cultivating a single crop. Multiple cropping is a cropping system designed to accommodate two or more intercrops of different heights, canopy patterns and rooting systems, to maximize the use of available sunlight, nutrients, moisture and land area under the principal crop coconut. Agro-forestry is a cropping system that specifically integrates tree species in the overall production system.

Interestingly, agro-forestry was evident only among REDD+ respondents. The crops grown by both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents were intended for cash and home consumption. The most widely grown crop in Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents was coconut followed by rootcrops and banana (Table 94). In addition to this, a significant number of respondents were planting rice.

Table 93. Cropping systems practiced by the households in farm parcel 1 Non REDD+ REDD+ Total Cropping System Count % Count % Count % Mono-cropping 96 48.5 205 35.2 301 38.5 Multiple cropping 55 27.8 190 32.6 245 31.4 Intercropping 47 23.7 186 31.9 233 29.8 Agro-forestry 2 0.3 2 0.3 Total 198 100.0 583 100.0 781 100.0

Table 94. Crops planted in parcel 1 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut 169 85.4 463 79.4 632 80.9 Rootcrops 81 40.9 401 68.8 482 61.7 Banana 79 39.9 283 48.5 362 46.4 Rice 34 17.2 65 11.1 99 12.7 Abaca 7 3.5 57 9.8 64 8.2 Fruit trees 20 10.1 32 5.5 52 6.6 Vegetables 10 5.0 16 2.8 26 3.3 Corn 2 1.0 18 3.1 20 2.6 Pineapple 2 1.0 11 1.9 13 1.7 Ginger 1 0.5 12 2.1 13 1.7 Forest trees 7 1.2 8 1.0 Coffee 7 1.2 7 0.9 Legumes 1 0.5 4 0.7 5 0.7 *multiple response

72 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte It was noted that second farm parcels were usually devoted to mono-cropping followed by multiple cropping for both the Non-REDD+ respondents and REDD+ respondents (Table 95). The dominance of monoculture among Non- REDD+ respondents can be attributed to the fact that their second land parcels were mostly situated in flat areas where they grew either rice or corn. The widely grown crops among Non-REDD+ respondents were coconut followed by banana and rice while that of REDD+ respondents were coconut followed by rootcrops and banana (Table 96).

Finally, mono-cropping was also the dominant cropping system observed in the third farm parcels of both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents (Table 97). The was followed by multiple cropping. The widely grown crops were coconut followed by banana and rice among the Non-REDD+ respondents; coconut, rootcrops and banana were the widely planted crops for REDD+ respondents (Table 98).

Table 95. Cropping systems in parcel 2 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Cropping System* Cases % Cases % Cases % Mono-cropping 84 59.2 174 49.0 258 51.9 Multiple cropping 29 20.4 118 33.2 147 29.6 Intercropping 29 20.4 62 17.5 91 18.3 Agro-forestry 1 0.3 1 0.2 Total 142 100.0 355 100.0 497 100.0

Table 96. Crops planted in parcel 2 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut 108 76.1 249 69.7 357 71.5 Rootcrops 25 17.5 145 40.7 170 34.0 Banana 38 26.8 100 28.0 138 27.7 Rice 30 21.1 66 18.5 96 19.2 Abaca 3 2.1 30 8.4 33 6.6 Fruit trees 8 5.6 17 4.8 25 5.0 Vegetables 15 4.3 15 3.0 Ginger 6 1.7 6 1.2 Corn 1 0.7 4 1.1 5 1.0 Forest trees 4 1.2 4 0.8 Legumes 2 0.6 2 0.4 Pineapple 1 0.7 1 0.2 *multiple response

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 73 Table 97. Cropping systems in parcel 3 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Cropping System* Cases % Cases % Cases % Mono-cropping 37 64.9 94 59.1 131 60.6 Multiple cropping 10 17.5 33 20.8 43 19.9 Intercropping 9 15.8 32 20.1 41 19.0 Agro-forestry 1 1.8 1 0.5 Total 57 100.0 159 100.0 216 100.0

Table 98. Crops planted in parcel 3 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut 42 73.7 114 71.3 156 71.9 Banana 15 26.3 41 25.6 56 25.8 Rootcrops 10 17.6 43 26.9 53 24.4 Rice 12 21.1 26 16.3 38 17.5 Abaca 14 8.8 14 6.5 Fruit trees 3 5.3 3 1.9 6 2.8 Vegetables 5 3.1 5 2.4 Forest trees 3 5.3 4 1.9 Corn 2 1.3 2 0.9 Pineapple 2 1.3 2 0.9 *multiple response

4.7.3 PERENNIAL / PERMANENT CROPS PLANTED

Permanent crops formed an integral part of the cropping system adopted by the respondents in the study sites. Table 99 takes a cursory view on the nature and kind of permanent crops planted by sample farm households in the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites. The table reflects the perennial crops planted by both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents considering all the farm parcels or farm lots they cultivated. Most farm-households in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites cultivated more than one parcel of land. As gleaned from the table, the most commonly grown permanent crops for both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents were coconut followed by forest trees and fruit trees. Other permanent crops included banana, abaca, and coffee. Among these crops, coffee was the least commonly cultivated and was planted only by REDD+ respondents. These crops were usually part of the multi-storey production system in the uplands of Southern Leyte.

Table 99. Perennial / permanent crops planted (all parcels considered) Perennial / Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Permanent Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut 161 80.5 420 70.4 581 72.9 Forest Trees 65 32.5 180 30.2 245 30.7 Fruit Trees 37 18.5 148 24.8 185 23.2 Banana 43 21.5 95 15.9 138 17.3

74 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Perennial / Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Permanent Crops* Cases % Cases % Cases % Abaca 9 4.5 33 5.5 42 5.3 Coffee 4 0.7 4 0.5 No perennial crop 23 11.5 78 13.1 101 12.7 Total 200 169.0 597 160.5 797 162.6 *Coconut, fruit trees, and forest trees are planted in several parcels

Crop mix or crop combination. Upland farmers usually plant various crops in their farms and practice mono-cropping, intercropping, multi-storey cropping, and other production schemes. Table 100 summarizes the combination of crops grown by the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ farmers based on principal or dominant crop. In both study sites and across crops planted, coconut appeared as the main crop. The most prominent crop combinations in both sites were coconut / banana, and coconut / banana / rootcrops. Furthermore, coconut was predominantly grown by both REDD+ and Non-REDD+ farmers in all sites since it can be planted either in lowland or upland area and could be best intercropped with banana and rootcrops, among many other crops.

Several cases of single crop (mono-crop) being cultivated were also reported by both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents. These crops include coconut, abaca and rice, in order from the most common to the least. Growing of either rootcrops or vegetables alone was also reported by a few respondents. It is interesting to note that some farmers were still growing abaca despite the “bunchy top” virus infestation that devastated the abaca industry in Southern Leyte.

Table 100. Summary of crop combinations planted by farmers in REDD+ and Non-REDD+ sites in Southern Leyte based on principal or dominant crop Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops Combination* Cases % Cases % Cases % Abaca 15 2.5 15 1.9 Abaca / rootcrops / corn 7 1.2 7 0.9 Banana / rootcrops 2 1.0 24 4.0 26 3.3 Coconut 172 86.0 355 59.5 527 66.1 Coconut / banana 78 39.0 163 27.3 241 30.2 Coconut / banana / rootcrops 41 20.5 157 26.3 198 24.8 Coconut / rootcrops 14 7.0 83 13.9 97 12.2 Coconut / forest trees / fruit trees 16 8.0 20 3.4 36 4.6 Coconut / abaca 5 2.5 30 5.0 35 4.4 Coconut / rice / corn 11 5.5 17 2.9 28 3.5 Coconut / banana / abaca / rootcrops 3 1.5 18 3.0 21 2.6 Coconut / banana / rootcrops / for- est trees / fruit trees / vegetables / 10 5.0 11 2.0 21 2.6 pineapple Coconut / fruit trees / abaca / 2 1.0 17 3.0 17 2.3 rootcrops / vegetables Coconut / banana / forest trees / 7 3.5 10 1.8 17 2.1 fruit trees

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 75 Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Crops Combination* Cases % Cases % Cases % Coconut / abaca / rice / rootcrops / 1 0.5 14 2.4 15 1.9 vegetables Coconut / banana / rice / corn 3 1.5 11 1.9 14 1.7 Coconut / banana / abaca 1 0.5 9 1.5 10 1.3 Coconut / banana / abaca / rootcrops / 9 1.5 9 1.2 fruit trees / forest trees / vegetables Coconut / banana / rootcrops / rice / veg- 2 1.0 7 1.1 9 1.2 etables Coconut / rice / rootcrops / pineapple 2 1.0 7 1.2 9 1.1 Corn / rice / rootcrops 1 0.5 13 2.1 14 1.8 Fruit trees / banana 4 2.0 8 1.4 12 1.5 Rice 76 38.0 121 20.3 197 24.7 Rootcrops 8 4.0 38 6.4 46 5.8 Vegetables 9 1.5 9 1.1 *multiple response

Reasons for not planting perennial crops. Although permanent or perennial crops are integral components of the cropping system for both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents, some did not plant trees in their farms. The primary reason for not planting trees was the perception among farmers that trees would affect coconut production due to shading and nutrient competition. Unavailability of land for planting trees was another reason cited by 20.4% of the Non-REDD+ respondents and 23.6% of the REDD+ household respondents. Planting trees would be a long-term investment which was not compatible with their immediate need for income to support household needs as mentioned by 10.2% and 21.7% of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ respondents (Table 101). This further reinforced the effect of land tenure on farmer’s decision to plant trees because without a secured tenure the probability of benefitting from the trees they planted is nil. The result demonstrates that aside from the lack of available space for tree planting, respondents were more concerned on safeguarding coconut which is their principal cash crop. Others consider tree planting as a long-term investment the benefit of which is uncertain compared to the immediate benefits of short- term investments. In some cases involving tenant-cultivators, the owner of the land determines which crop to be cultivated in the farm.

Table 101. Reasons for not planting trees Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % It affects coconut production 23 46.9 39 36.8 62 40.0 No land for planting 10 20.4 25 23.6 35 22.6

76 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % Long term investment 5 10.2 23 21.7 28 18.1 Lack of labor 5 10.2 10 9.4 15 9.7 No available seeds 3 6.1 5 4.7 8 5.2 The owner don’t want to plant any trees 1 2.0 4 3.8 5 3.2 Not a land owner 1 2.0 2 1.9 3 1.9 Location is too far 1 2.0 1 0.9 2 1.3 Because land is not titled 1 0.9 1 0.6 *multiple response

Reasons for not cultivating the land. It is interesting to note some of the respondents’ report of not actively cultivating their farms at present. The primary reason for this was the lack of farm labor from the household (Table 102). As the first generation of cultivators started to age, no members from the household are willing to take responsibility of doing farm chores most probably because they are already engaged in more productive economic ventures. Some respondents also allowed their farms to fallow, to allow continuously cropped farms to regenerate for some time. Some respondents even subjected their abaca farm under fallow after the “bunchy top” infestation on abaca. Some did not cultivate their lands because of physical constraint specifically the distance from the residence to the farm, and financial constraints. The scenario somehow provides practical and ecological solution to the denudation problems in the uplands. As old age and financial constraints limit the capacity of some farmers to cultivate their lands, there is greater probability that upland farms would be abandoned and thus, could regenerate naturally over time.

Table 102. Reasons for not using land for farming Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Reasons* Cases % Cases % Cases % Lack of labor 31 73.8 164 88.2 195 85.5 Difficult access 8 19.0 42 22.6 50 21.9 Under fallow 10 23.8 39 20.9 49 21.5 Theft of crops / animals 29 15.6 29 12.7 Financial problem 5 11.9 21 11.3 26 11.4 Long term investment 1 2.4 24 12.9 25 11.0 Conflicts over ownership 1 2.4 16 8.6 17 7.5 Low productivity 4 9.5 8 4.3 12 5.3 Legal status (Timberland) 1 2.4 5 2.6 6 2.6 Soil erosion 4 2.2 4 1.8 No available seeds 1 2.4 2 1.1 3 1.3 *multiple response

4.7.4 POULTRY AND LIVESTOCK RAISING

Aside from crops, farmers were keen on raising farm animals like poultry and livestock as their secondary source of income and food. The raising of poultry and livestock in their farms by the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ respondents is presented

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 77 in Table 103. More than 500 respondents (66.4%) answered “no” when asked if they are raising poultry and livestock in their farm while the other one-third (33.6%) replied that they are raising animals in their farms. The inability to raise animals in their farms may be due to lack of capital, area, and management skills.

Table 103. Raising of poultry and livestock on the farm Raising Poultry / Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Livestock Count % Count % Count % No 136 68.0 393 65.8 529 66.4 Yes 64 32.0 204 34.2 268 33.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Kind of poultry and livestock raised. Table 104 shows the kind of poultry and livestock raised by the REDD+ and Non-REDD+ farmers in Southern Leyte. As the case in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites, there are respondents who raised two or more kinds of livestock, if not a combination of livestock and poultry. Thus, the counts of animals and poultry raised by households in both sites exceeded the number of respondents from each group. For both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households combined, poultry (47.2%) was the major animal raised in the farms followed by swine (27.5%), and carabaos (13.4%). However, a comparison between the two groups of respondents showed that the REDD+ farmers raised the higher proportion of poultry (48.4%) while the Non-REDD+ households raised a higher proportion of swine (34.0%) and carabaos (15%). The income from poultry and livestock-raising augmented the earnings from crop production notwithstanding the fact that carabaos were a great help to farmers during land preparation and transportation of harvest.

Table 104. Kind of poultry and livestock raised by the households Kind of Poultry and Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Livestock Raised* Cases % Cases % Cases % Poultry 87 43.5 289 48.4 376 47.2 Swine 68 34.0 151 25.3 219 27.5 Carabao 30 15.0 77 12.9 107 13.4 Cattle 8 4.0 40 6.7 48 6.0 Goat 10 5.0 16 2.7 26 3.3 Fighting cock 2 1.0 8 1.3 10 1.3 Horse 5 0.8 5 0.6 Breeding 1 0.5 1 0.1 No poultry / livestock 64 32.0 204 34.2 268 33.6 * multiple response

4.7.5 FOREST PRODUCTS HARVESTING AND MARKETING

Timber and non-timber forest products and by-products were harvested by the households which can either be consumed or sold as alternative source of income.

78 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Forest products and by-products that were identified and were harvested included bamboo, firewood, materials for construction, edible wild animals such as wild pigs, medicinal plants, birds, rattan, and coconut husks / shells processed as charcoal. Table 105 shows the forest products harvested and marketed by the households. Bamboo, firewood, and materials for construction were the most common forest products harvested by the Non-REDD+ respondents. REDD+ respondents also pointed out bamboo, firewood, and edible plants as the commonly harvested forest products. Generally, forest products and by-products such as firewood, bamboo, and edible plants were the major products harvested by respondents in their area. Nevertheless, the aforementioned forest products were not meant to be sold solely as a source of additional income. These were largely intended for home use such as firewood and construction materials or for home consumption as in the case of edible plants and wild animals. As shown in the table, the number of marketed forest products and by-products is very much lower in volume than those harvested products intended for consumption. Commonly, most Filipino rural households use firewood for cooking which they themselves gather from their own farms. Also, minor repairs at home are done using construction materials from wood which they gather from the forest.

Table 105. Forest products harvested and marketed by the households Forest Products Harvested and Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Marketed* Cases % Cases % Cases % Harvested Bamboo 87 61.7 218 50.6 305 53.3 Firewood 76 53.9 260 60.3 336 58.7 Materials for construction 18 12.8 42 9.7 60 10.5 Edible plants 13 9.2 107 24.8 120 21.0 Wild animals 8 5.6 65 15.0 73 12.7 Medicinal plants 4 2.8 31 7.2 35 6.1 Birds 3 2.1 23 5.2 26 4.6 Rattan 12 2.8 12 2.1 Coco husks / shells 3 0.7 3 0.5 Marketed Firewood 7 43.8 44 57.9 51 55.4 Construction materials 7 43.8 28 36.9 35 38.0 Bamboo 7 43.8 23 30.3 30 32.6 Edible plants 2 12.5 11 14.5 13 14.1 Rattan 8 9.9 8 9.2 Charcoal 1 1.3 1 1.1 Fuel 1 1.3 1 1.1 Wild pigs 1 1.3 1 1.1 *multiple response

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 79 4.7.6 OTHER PRODUCTION PRACTICES

Majority of the respondents no longer practiced shifting cultivation (Table 106), contrary to established notion that it is the most common production practice in the upland. Obviously, there could be a transition from shifting cultivation to a more sedentary type of cultivation in upland nowadays. For instance, livestock production had been integrated into the production system.

Despite this change, not many of the respondents applied cultural management practices like crop rotation in the farm (Table 107). This could be due to the fact that not many of them were able to observe soil-related problems in their farms (Table 108).

Table 106. Distribution of respondents practicing kaingin / shifting cultivation for the past five years Practicing Kaingin Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total System Count % Count % Count % Yes 54 27.0 257 43.0 311 39.0 No 146 73.0 340 57.0 486 61.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 107. Distribution of respondents practicing crop rotation Practice Crops Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Rotation? Count % Count % Count % Yes 56 28.0 211 35.3 267 33.5 No 144 72.0 386 64.7 530 66.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Table 108. Soil-related problems on the farm Any Soil-related Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Problems on Farm Count % Count % Count % Yes 48 24.0 162 27.1 210 26.3 No 152 76.0 435 72.9 587 73.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.7.7 POST-HARVEST FACILITIES

Almost all of the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ household respondents in the study sites did not have access to solar drying and warehouse facilities (Table 109). Likewise, a greater majority of households did not have access to milling / shelling and threshing facilities since these facilities are usually located at the town proper or in adjacent but strategic barangays. The absence or lack of post-harvest facilities in the study sites was commonly observed among upland farming households and not only among the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ barangays. However, in areas where the demand for such services is high, well-off residents or entrepreneurs provide services like rice / corn milling, threshing, and drying. In remote areas, however,

80 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte the lack of storage and post-harvest facilities has been a perennial problem among upland farmers and constrained them from expanding their production and increasing their income. As a consequence, they remained poor and survived through a vicious cycle of subsistence upland farming.

Table 109. Availability of postharvest facilities Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Facility Count % Count % Count % Solar drying Yes 4 2.0 12 2.0 16 2.0 No 196 98.0 585 98.0 781 98.0 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Milling / shelling Yes 50 25.0 93 15.6 143 17.9 No 150 75.0 504 84.4 654 82.1 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Threshing Yes 43 21.5 99 16.6 142 17.8 No 157 78.5 498 83.4 655 82.2 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Warehouse Yes 3 1.5 9 1.5 12 1.5 No 197 98.5 588 98.5 785 98.5 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 81 [This page is left intentionally blank.] 4.8 INCOME AND EXPENDITURE

This section discusses the various sources and amount of the sample households’ income and expenditure patterns by study sites. A brief discussion on the amount of household income and expenditures as well as the distribution of household income and expenditure by income cluster is likewise included in order to get some relevant information on the possible similarities or differences between the practices of farm households in Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites that may be of relevance to the REDD+ project interventions.

4.8.1 SOURCES OF INCOME

Like some rural upland communities in the Philippines, the most important economic activity in the study sites is upland farming. Farming households mainly obtained their income from working on their farms either as owner-cultivators or farmer-cultivators under some form of land owner and cultivator arrangements. There were also households which earned income while working in other people’s farm as hired workers during slack periods in farming operations. Some farmers including hired farm and non-farm workers were usually engaged in other income earning activities to generate additional income to support the needs of their family. Those who were involved in farming activities worked as hired workers to do weeding, planting, land preparation and other farm activities. The income earned from working as hired farm workers are classified as off-farm incomes. In remote villages not accessible to any means of transportation, one common source of off- farm income among households was hauling of farm products such as copra and abaca. Non-farm incomes were also earned by members of the households from activities that are not farm related. In the study area, these activities included income from salary / wages, carpentry, plumbing, cottage industries and entrepreneurial activities such as managing a sari-sari store, buy and sell business and habal-habal (motorcycle) driving. Incomes from salaries and wages were usually earned by the wives, sons and daughters of the family who are employed either in private businesses or public / private institutions located at the commercial or municipal center or “poblacion”. Aside from households with income from salaries and wages, incomes of households from non-farm sources were usually seasonal because of limited job opportunities in the non-farm sector in the study sites.

Sources of income of households. Almost all of both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ household heads claimed that farming was their primary source of income. In addition to working on their farms, some household heads also earned income as barangay officials, hired workers, government employees, service workers, or fishermen (Table 110). A few of the household heads are retired from government workers and are dependent on their monthly pensions. Only very few have alternative employment activities to augment income from the farm. This implies heavy dependence on their farm to support family needs and more reasons to encroach to the forest to do farming or harvest forest products. Interventions in

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 83 the form of alternative livelihoods are a welcome development because these will reduce their dependence on their farms for their food needs.

Table 110. Primary and secondary source of income of household heads Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Occupation Count % Count % Count % Primary Occupation Farmer 195 97.5 573 96.0 768 96.4 None 1 0.5 7 1.2 8 1.0 Service worker 3 1.5 4 0.7 7 0.9 Agricultural worker 7 1.2 7 0.9 Self-employed 3 0.5 3 0.4 Laborer, production and related 2 0.3 2 0.3 worker Brgy. Official / Brgy. Worker 1 0.5 1 0.1 Retired gov’t official 1 0.2 1 0.1 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Secondary Occupation None 132 66.0 393 65.8 525 65.9 Brgy. Official / Brgy. Worker 33 16.5 84 14.1 117 14.7 Agricultural worker 9 4.5 37 6.2 46 5.8 Service worker 12 6.0 34 5.7 46 5.7 Laborer, production and related 7 3.5 29 4.9 36 4.5 worker Self-employed 3 1.5 6 1.0 9 1.1 Farmer 2 1.0 4 0.7 6 0.8 Fisherman 5 0.8 5 0.6 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

4.8.2 FARM INCOME

Income from upland farming is the major source of household income in the study area. Returns or income are usually earned after all the labor and material inputs and other related services are all paid for.

Labor inputs. Labor employed on upland farms is one of the basic and essential factors in crop production usually provided by the family and / or hired labor. In most upland farms dominated by coconut, labor utilization may vary widely depending on the kind and number of other crops planted under coconut. Coconut when planted alone requires very low labor since labor inputs mainly involves minimal cleaning and weeding operation, harvesting and copra production. Likewise, it is also a practice among well-off farmers to hire caretakers to take care of their coconut plantations for an agreed fee or share of the harvest. The caretakers usually do the plantation maintenance and sometimes the harvesting of the crop. On the other hand, farmers who adopt intercropping and / or multi-storey cropping system utilize more labor in their farming operations because different crops require different cultural, harvest and post-harvest management.

Table 111 presents the mean and median number of man-days spent by the households for their farms. Average number of man-days utilized by the Non- REDD+ and REDD+ sample farm-households was 71.28 and 83.58 man-days,

84 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte respectively. On the average, the amount of family labor employed by the sample Non-REDD+ (36.33 man-days) and REDD+ farm-households (39.81 man-days) are practically the same. In terms of the hired labor inputs, the sample REDD+ farm-households utilized higher man-days (43.77) of labor as compared to that of the Non-REDD+ farmers which employed 34.96 man-days. This is because REDD+ farmers hired more laborers to work on the production of their crops for farm operations that cannot be done by the family members themselves. Also, some farm parcels or farm lots were located far from the market road requiring additional labor for carrying inputs and farm products.

Table 111. Family, hired, and total labor utilized in man-days Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Type of Labor Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Family Labor 36.33 18.00 39.81 20.00 38.94 19.00 Hired Labor 34.96 18.00 43.77 10.00 41.56 12.00 Total 71.28 49.50 83.58 41.00 80.50 44.00

Material inputs utilized. Material inputs basically referred to the inputs used in the production of crops such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, and all inputs other than labor. Majority (59.5%) of the Non-REDD+ and a greater majority of the REDD+ respondents (72.2%) did not apply any materials input on their farms (Table 112). Among those who utilized material inputs, a higher proportion of the Non-REDD+ respondents (33.5%) followed by REDD+ respondents (20.3%) applied pesticides. The other inputs applied were fertilizers specifically complete fertilizer, urea, and ammonium phosphate. It must be noted, however, that respondents in both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites employed more than two farm inputs. It can likewise be assumed that the sample farm-households that applied inputs must have applied pesticides and fertilizers like complete and urea to increase crop production and presumably, to prevent and / or control pests or the incidence of pest infestation on their farms.

Table 112. Distribution of farm-households according to material inputs utilized in their farm Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Material Inputs Used* Cases % Cases % Cases % Pesticides 67 33.5 121 20.3 188 23.6 Complete 64 32.0 112 18.8 176 22.1 Urea 38 19.0 66 11.1 104 13.0 Ammonium phosphate 8 4.0 19 3.2 27 3.4 Muriate of potash 8 4.0 7 1.2 15 1.9 Soil conditioner 2 0.3 2 0.3 Did not apply material input 119 59.5 431 72.2 550 69.0 Total 200 152.0 597 127.0 797 133.2 *multiple response

Gross farm income and gross margin. Gross farm income, total variable costs, and gross margin was calculated to get an idea on the nature of earnings that

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 85 sample farm-households derive from the farm operation in the study sites. Gross farm income is the total cash and non-cash income that farmers received from the perennial and annual crops produced, poultry and livestock raised on their farms. Total variable costs is the sum total of all the cash and non-cash expenditures incurred on labor and material inputs on each annual and / or perennial crop, poultry and livestock produced by the farmers. The gross margin is mainly the difference between gross farm income and total variable costs. This measure represents the returns to the operator’s farm labor, management, and capital investment on their farms. While majority of the research findings as pointed out by the review of Pabuayon, et. al. (2008) showed that higher productivity and income of coconut- based farming systems are associated with diversified cropping, empirical results differ across sites. For instance, the technology assessment survey of Armenia, et. al. (1990) covering coconut-based farms in selected areas in Region 8 showed that yearly gross margin per hectare from multi-storey cropping, mixed cropping, and intercropping was only P11,974, P4,036, and P3,562, respectively. Likewise, De Luna (2008) and Cabangbang, et. al. (1991) found that incomes are lower for farms with more intercrops due to additional labor expenses. On the other hand, Bueno (1978) showed that combined income from perennial crops such as coffee, cacao, and lanzones provided substantial contribution and even exceeded the income earned from coconut production.

As shown in Table 113, gross farm income was P57,335 and P50,573 for the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sample household respondents, respectively. Higher average total variable costs was incurred by the sample Non-REDD+ households (P16,046) compared with the REDD+ households (P13,476). Gross margins per farm was more than forty thousand (P41,781) for the Non-REDD+ sample households and less than forty thousand (P37,213) for the REDD+ households. On a per hectare basis, however, the gross margins between the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households was P19,627 and P19,568, respectively. As observed during the field validation, the higher gross margins per hectare that Non-REDD+ and REDD+ farm-households earned compared to the previous studies (e.g., Armenia, et. al. (1990)) can be mainly attributed to the high price of copra and other farm products reported in the current study and not due to possible increase in farm productivity.

Table 113. Gross farm income, total variable costs, and gross margins Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Item Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Gross Farm Income Per Farm 57,335 43,360 50,573 34,008 52,281 36,440 Total Variable Costs Per Farm 16,046 13,658 13,476 10,090 14,114 10,760 Gross Margin Per Farm 41,781 27,167 37,213 22,898 38,366 24,450 Gross Margin Per Ha 19,627 15,214 19,568 10,967 19,583 12,297

86 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4.8.3 OFF-FARM AND NON-FARM INCOME

This section discusses the availability and the distribution of off-farm and non-farm income sources of sample households in the two study sites.

Availability of off-farm and non- farm incomes. Table 114 shows that majority of the households from the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites did not earn off-farm incomes. However, for the households that reported earning off-farm incomes, the REDD+ sites showed a comparatively higher proportion compared to the other group indicating that there is more off-farm income opportunities for households in the REDD+ sites. Head of households and / or their family members usually work in other farmers’ farms during slack periods. While majority of the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites earned income from jobs that are not farm-related, most of those engaged in non-farm income earning activities were family members other than the household heads such as the wives, children, and other relatives living with the family.

Table 114. Distribution of households with earnings from off-farm and non-farm related activities Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Source of Income Count % Count % Count % Without 130 65.0 343 57.5 473 59.3 Off-farm Income With 70 35.0 254 42.5 324 40.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0 Without 25 12.5 73 12.2 98 12.3 Non-farm Income With 175 87.5 524 87.8 699 87.7 Total 200 100.0 597 100.0 797 100.0

Sources of non-farm incomes. Table 115 reflects sources of non-farm incomes. Majority of REDD+ and Non-REDD+ household respondents who did not engage in non-farm related activities were those members of the households who received salaries and wages as hired workers or government employees. Majority from both the Non-REDD+ (56.6%) and from the REDD+ households (56.9%) derived their non-farm income from salaries and wages. It is important to note that majority of households in both sites, also derived income from other non-farm sources such as remittances of household members working abroad or in local establishments. Likewise, almost 20% of the total number of household heads interviewed said they also earned income from their business such as managing a variety store; some were also engaged in cottage industries and in transportation services. It is worth noting that only very few households were into activities that involved extracting or harvesting from the forests or from the sea to earn income. Most of the non-farm income generating activities did not involve the use of natural resources like cutting

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 87 trees. Some of the households harvested forest products like fuel wood for home consumption only.

Nature of work for household members with salaries and wages. More than half of both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households who did not rely on farm related income were receiving salaries and wages (Table 116). This group was usually composed of wives and children rather than household heads. Fifty– nine percent of those receiving salaries were employed in either local or national government offices; 15.4% worked as laborers or production workers; 12.3% were service workers and the rest were household helps. Less than 10% of Non-REDD+ household members worked as laborers and farm workers; for REDD+ household members, 17.2% were employed as laborers and production. Some Non-REDD+ household members (15.7%) worked as service workers; 11.2% of the REDD+ household workers were engaged the same livelihood. Some household members in the Non-REDD+ communities worked as household helpers (2.5%); in the REDD+ communities, 6.3% worked as household helps. Eleven or 9.1% were practicing dentists, medical doctors, lawyers and teachers, among other professions. This was also true for the REDD+ communities where 3.5% practiced their professions. In the study areas, a person who graduated from college is considered as professional. However, there were those who earned their degrees but did not practice them.

Table 115. Non-farm income sources of the households Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Non-Farm Income Sources* Cases % Cases % Cases % Salaries / Wages 99 56.6 298 56.9 397 56.8 Wholesale / Retail Business 38 21.7 97 18.5 135 19.3 Manufacturing / Cottage Indus- 26 14.9 76 14.5 102 14.6 tries Community / Personal Services 6 3.4 22 4.2 28 4.0 Transport / Communication 14 8.0 48 9.2 62 8.9 Carpentry / Related Work 1 0.6 2 0.4 3 0.4 Mining / Quarrying Work 1 0.2 1 0.1 Other Non-Farm Income** 128 73.1 387 73.9 515 73.7 Forestry / Hunting 4 2.3 13 2.5 17 2.4 Fishing 1 0.6 14 2.7 15 2.1 *multiple response **please refer to Table 120 (income from other sources)

Table 116. Nature of work for those with salaries and wages Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Nature of Works* Cases % Cases % Cases % Local / National Gov’t office 74 61.1 214 58.4 288 59.0 Laborer, farm worker 12 9.9 63 17.2 75 15.4 Service worker 19 15.7 41 11.2 60 12.3 Household help 3 2.5 23 6.3 26 5.3 Professional 11 9.1 13 3.5 24 4.9 Sales worker 1 0.8 9 2.5 10 2.0 Clerical 1 0.8 2 0.5 3 0.6 Pension 2 0.5 2 0.4 *multiple response

88 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Income from goods sold. A number of households (135) from both Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites were engaged in business and 64.2% of which managed “sari- sari” or small grocery / variety store. More than 16% sold farm products, 8.3% sold beverages and there were those who were into buy and sell and ready-to-wear (RTW) business. One respondent sold medicines and another one sold electronic cell phone loads. Their stores are usually located within or in an extension of the house and run by the household members themselves. These enterprises were primarily small scale, which explains the low income they generated. As such, alternative livelihood opportunities would prove to be beneficial to the households (Table 117).

Table 117. Income from trading or buying and selling businesses Sources of Income from Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Goods Sold* Cases % Cases % Cases % “Sari-sari” store 26 66.7 66 63.2 93 64.2 Farm products 7 17.9 17 16.0 24 16.6 Beverages 3 7.7 9 8.5 12 8.3 Buy and sell 2 5.2 6 5.7 8 5.6 Ready to wear apparels (RTW) 1 2.6 3 2.8 4 2.8 e-Load 3 2.8 3 2.1 Medicine 1 0.9 1 0.7 *multiple response

Income from home-based industries. A number of respondents from both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites were engaged in home-based cottage industries, a larger proportion of which were into charcoal making (31.6%). As reported by the households and verified from field observations, charcoal making in the study sites are mainly coconut-based charcoal and not wood charcoal. It can be gleaned from Table 118 that a larger proportion of household from the REDD+ sites as compared to the Non-REDD+ sites were involved in charcoal making. This was followed by those engaged in home-based snack / food, handicrafts, and “tuba” production. Of the home industries identified, the most common activity that requires the use of forest products is handicrafts and furniture making. Charcoal making may contribute to the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. However, furniture and handicraft making is also a threat to the forest as the demand for a steady supply of raw material in producing furniture pieces may result to illegal cutting of trees.

Table 118. Nature and income from home-based industries and related activities Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Home-based activities* Cases % Cases % Cases % Charcoal making 4 14.8 32 36.7 36 31.6 Snack / Food 4 14.8 24 27.6 28 24.6 Handicraft 7 25.9 20 23.0 27 23.7 “Tuba” production 8 29.6 3 3.4 11 9.7 Dressmaking 4 14.8 3 3.4 7 6.1 Furniture making 4 4.6 4 3.5 Hollow block production 1 1.1 1 0.9 *multiple response

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 89 Income from transportation services. Only very few of the respondents were involved in transportation related services and most of the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites that earn income from transportation related services operate motorcycle for hire which is locally known as habal-habal (Table 119). The operation of habal-habal is a major alternative means of transportation in the study sites since public transportation to and from the central market in the municipality proper is wanting especially so in remote villages.

Table 119. Types of transportation services that are income sources Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Income from Transport Services* Cases % Cases % Cases % Operation of transport facilities 13 92.9 49 100.0 62 98.4 Jeep 1 7.1 1 1.6 *multiple response

4.8.4 INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES

Aside from farm, off-farm, and non-farm incomes mentioned ahead, household respondents also earned income from other sources. Majority of the households in both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites that claimed of earning other income reported that they received remittances from their children who went to cities or other places within the country to seek employment (Table 120). Another important sources of income was the remittances of children or wives working abroad as reported by 25.4% of the Non-REDD+ and 18.3% of the REDD+ households. Other household members also contributed money to finance household utilities and food needs. Some households rented out their lands as reported by 1.6% of the Non-REDD+ and 2.7% of the REDD+ households. Likewise, a considerable number from both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households considered earning incomes from lottery or “lotto” and putting bets was commonly observed among rural households not only in the study sites.

Table 120. Income from other sources Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Other Sources of Income* Cases % Cases % Cases % Remittances from local employment 89 73.0 306 81.2 395 79.2 Remittances from abroad 31 25.4 69 18.3 100 20.0 Winnings / Windfall 15 12.3 60 15.9 75 15.0 Land rental 2 1.6 10 2.7 12 2.4 Rental of properties other than land 2 1.6 5 1.3 7 1.4 and buildings Interest on bank deposits 2 1.6 3 0.8 5 1.0 Interest income 2 1.6 2 0.5 4 0.8 Building rental 1 0.8 2 0.5 3 0.6 Space rental 1 0.3 1 0.2 *multiple response

90 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Income from forest products. In the rural upland areas, it is commonly observed that households collect or harvest forest products most especially fuel wood for home consumption. However, when queried whether they derived income from forest products, only a few respondents from both the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ study sites reported that they harvested forest products for the income it generate (Table 121). Of those who harvested forest products, two households from the Non-REDD+ and four households from the REDD+ communities harvested fuel woods. Other forest products harvested or gathered included wood for timber, coconut shells, birds and edible plants. In the REDD+ communities, more respondents answered in the affirmative when asked if they harvested forest products to generate income. However, this number is relatively low and it could be explained by the fact that harvesting forest products, especially cutting of trees, is now prohibited. Those engaged in furniture making cut trees from small tree farms and not from natural forests. Although charcoal making is also done in some areas, the use of wood for charcoal is not practiced by charcoal makers. Coconut shells were utilized for charcoal making instead. One possible reason for the seemingly very low reported income from forest products harvested by households could be attributed to non-disclosure among the respondents even more so that this activity is prohibited by law. Another reason for such phenomenon is that households do not consider the gathering of fuel wood and other forest products for home consumption as income since there is no actual cash or money received from such activities. As observed during the “key informants” interview to verify this seeming discrepancy, it was noticed that gathering of available forest products such as fuel wood was mostly done in both sites but mostly for home consumption only. As gathered from key informants, households either used fuel wood or a combination of fuel wood and LPG for cooking. Utilization for personal use or consumption was also true for the other available forest products. A few “key informants”, however, reported the existence of a few small-scale gathering of fuel wood for sale within the study sites which tend to validate the survey findings showing low reported income from the harvest or collection of forest products.

Table 121. Forest products harvested as source of household income Income from Forest Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Products Count % Count % Count % Fire wood 2 66.7 4 30.8 6 37.5 Coconut shells 1 33.3 1 7.7 2 12.5 Wood / Timber 6 46.2 6 37.5 Birds 1 7.7 1 6.3 Edible plants 1 7.7 1 6.3 Total 3 100.0 13 100.0 16 100.0

4.8.5 ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND EXPENDITURES

This section discusses the sources and amount of annual household income and expenditure in the study sites. Owing to the existence of a number of household

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 91 respondents with relatively high incomes as well as expenditures, averages and medians are presented in order to show more descriptive magnitude of the amount of the annual household income earned and the expenditures incurred by sample households in both study sites.

Household income from all sources. The average annual income of households was calculated considering their farm income, off-farm income, non-farm income, and income from other sources. As shown in Table 122, the average income of household respondents was P118,761. Using the average annual income of Southern Leyte from the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) in 2009 which was estimated at P141,641 as reference (NSCB, 2010), it can be said that the average annual income of the Non-REDD+ households (P135,491) is higher than that of the REDD+ households (P113,136). This result mainly indicates that the average annual income in the REDD+ pilot sites was not only lower compared to the Non-REDD+ sites but also lower than the average income of households for the Province of Southern Leyte. The median incomes, for its part, were consistently lower than the average across the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ sites implying that there is a larger proportion of households earning income lower than the average set for the province. This could be attributed to the fact that the Non-REDD+ and REDD+ households surveyed were generally located in the upland barangays where majority of the households are poor. Moreover, lower income among REDD+ barangays could be further attributed to the lower income opportunities of households in these areas owing to their relatively farther distance from the commercial or trading centers as compared to the Non-REDD+ households.

As gleaned from Table 122, the average farm income of households constitutes about one-third of the average household income from off-farm, non-farm, and income from other sources. Average annual off-farm income however is only P16,134 for the Non-REDD+ households and P16,140 for the REDD+ households. In the Non-REDD+ study sites, a bigger part of the annual household income is contributed by non-farm income amounting to P60,451. In comparison, the non- farm income in the REDD+ group was only P45,996. Lower income in REDD+ households is indicative of lower income opportunities and greater pressure for them to meet their food and other basic household needs. With limited non-farm income and seasonal off-farm income opportunities, there are two alternatives left for the REDD+ households: either increase farm productivity of existing farms or expand farm area. If farm productivity proves difficult to improve, households may scout an additional area for cultivation or expand existing farm which may lead to forest encroachment. Hence, the availability of alternative income sources to augment farm income and lessen the pressure on the forest is a critical program or policy consideration.

92 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte Table 122. Annual income from different sources Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Income Sources Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Farm Income 57,335 43,360 50,573 34,008 52,281 36,440 Off-farm Income 16,134 12,600 16,140 12,000 16,139 12,000 Non-farm Income 60,451 32,000 45,996 26,000 49,625 28,000 Other Income 30,944 12,000 24,314 10,000 25,978 11,100 Average Income 135,491 90,580 113,136 81,676 118,761 83,800

Household consumption expenditures. Among others, the FIES in 2009 survey showed that the average annual family expenditures for the Province of Southern Leyte was P117,003 (NSCB, 2010). In the study sites, however, the average annual expenditures by households for the Non-REDD+ and the REDD+ sites is P90,242 and P75,348, respectively (Table 123). As in the median annual income of households in both study sites, the median annual household expenditures was also consistently lower than average in both study sites indicating that there are larger fraction of households with relatively lower than average annual expenditures.

As shown in Table 123, households in both study sites allocated or spent the bulk of their income on food (62%) followed by education (8%), special occasion (8%), transport and communication (6%), recreation (4%), and other expenditures (4%). On the average, the Non-REDD+ households have comparatively higher average expenditures in practically all expenditure items but their proportional distribution across expenditure items seemed to be comparable with REDD+ households. However, it can be gleaned from the table that on the average, the Non-REDD+ households allocated 57% of their income on food and 10% on education; while the REDD+ households, allocated 64% of their income to food and only 8% on education.

The third highest ranking expenditure for both the Non-REDD+ and the REDD+ households is on special occasions. Aside from food and education, it is part of the Filipino culture or tradition to allocate or hold lavish party or celebration during special occasions such as fiestas, birthdays and / or weddings. Another important expenditure item of households was transportation and communication (e.g., expenditures on public transportation as well on landline and / or mobile telephone system). This was followed by expenditures on recreation as well as on other expenditures which covered house rentals, water charges, and cooking utilities.

Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 93 Table 123. Average and median annual household expenditures Non-REDD+ REDD+ Total Expenditure Mean % Median Mean % Median Mean % Median Food 51,124 57.0 46,614 47,859 64.0 45,360 48,680 62.0 45,696 Education 8,874 10.0 2,450 5,834 8.0 1,500 6,599 8.0 1,500 Clothing 1,108 1.0 500 864 1.0 500 925 1.0 500 Electricity 3,793 4.0 2,040 2,364 3.0 1,440 2,724 3.0 1,680 Transport & 5,284 6.0 2,400 4,203 6.0 2,160 4,475 6.0 2,280 Communication Personal Care 2,828 3.0 2,400 2,285 3.0 1,800 2,421 3.0 1,800 Special Occasions 8,122 9.0 5,000 5,726 8.0 3,460 6,329 8.0 4,000 Recreation 4,217 5.0 1,200 2,827 4.0 1,200 3,177 4.0 1,200 Other Expenditures 4,210 5.0 2,106 3,008 4.0 1,800 3,310 4.0 1,896 Total 90,242 100.0 76,020 75,348 100.0 67,776 79,095 100.0 69,930

94 Socio-Economic Baseline for the REDD+ Project Sites in Southern Leyte 4.9 HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS, AMOUNT OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE BY INCOME CLUSTERS

This section takes a brief snapshot of the households, farm and non-farm income and expenditure allocation of the sample farm households by income cluster. The discussion focuses on the similarities and / or differences between or among the income clusters which might be of relevance to the implementation of the REDD+ project activities and intervention.

Distribution of households by income cluster. Using the FIES survey data to classify households, Virola, et. al., (2007)